On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Andrey Tretyakov <[email protected]> wrote:
> The best would be to separate docs /PR material from the software code. > It doesn't even have to have same license. > The most important thing for opensource writers is giving credit, that's > why > many people like Creative Commons licenses. I understand the need for > contributor agreement for the software, but not for the docs / PR > materials. > I don't know what we do with the website but I will say that for doc contributions I tend to not worry about the contributor's agreement - whereas for code we do. I'm one of the primary maintainers and I honestly don't know if that's right or not. That being said, the primary Pyramid docs *are* licensed under a different license. It is CC-NC-SA and you can see it here: https://github.com/Pylons/pyramid/blob/master/LICENSE.txt#L101-L105 As far as the website and other marketing, I cannot comment on those as I do not deal with them often. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pylons-discuss/CAKdhhwHcPy8i_NSxj0nVD_goueMFawfUzn385DVu5rhpU4WNuw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
