By: Transparante Zaken (transparantezaken) 's status on Tuesday, 07-Jul-09...
[...] http://iquaid.org/2009/07/06/why-relicense-fedora-documentation-and-wiki-content/ [...]
View ArticleBy: Paul W. Frields
Agreed that this change is probably overdue. I think Fedora and Red Hat have been chasing each other’s licensing tails in an ineffective manner for some time, without looking at the broader community...
View ArticleBy: Jeremy Katz
Glad to see this happening. The move to OPL was always a weird one to me but as Paul says, there really wasn’t a consensus at the time we made the last licensing move. I think today, though, the...
View ArticleBy: quaid
We have definitely built consensus, amongst the wiki team, the Docs Team, and anyone who reads fedora-advisory-board. My concern about going in the direction of “get permission from everyone” is that...
View ArticleBy: Jim Campbell (j1mc) 's status on Tuesday, 07-Jul-09 19:39:00 UTC - Identi.ca
[...] http://iquaid.org/2009/07/06/why-relicense-fedora-documentation-and-wiki-content/ [...]
View ArticleBy: Denis
we could organize a poll (the question could be something like: “Would you agree to re-license Fedora content?”) with anyone having signed the CLA. Hence, if the majority answers “No” (which I hardly...
View ArticleBy: Greg Grossmeier (greg) 's status on Tuesday, 07-Jul-09 19:53:58 UTC -...
[...] http://iquaid.org/2009/07/06/why-relicense-fedora-documentation-and-wiki-content/ [...]
View ArticleBy: Jeff Sheltren
I’m very happy to see Fedora make this transition. OPL is “dead” and does not have the legal strength that CC does. The purpose of the licensing is to allow free re-use of the content, so it’s hard to...
View ArticleBy: fedorablog.de
Fedora wechselt die Lizenz… Karsten Wade gibt bekannt, dass das Fedora Project plant, sich von der mittlerweile veralteten OPL zu verabschieden und die Inhalte stattdessen unter eine CC-BY-SA...
View Article