From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RVZme-00074q-Bv for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 02:20:28 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C490F21C0D7; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 02:20:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5B9221C0C7 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 02:19:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A7841B4083 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 02:19:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.147 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=1.256, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.201, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10_gBT_tKAhA for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 02:19:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D36281B4074 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 02:19:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RVZld-0006rz-2Z for gentoo-doc@gentoo.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 03:19:25 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 03:19:25 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 03:19:25 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-doc@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-doc] Re: Supporting CC-BY-SA 3.0 and later versions Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 02:19:13 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20111127174137.GC18017@gentoo.org> <20111128202124.GA3215@vagaaru.bolita.nimiux.org> <20111129130101.GA5918@gentoo.org> <4ED4F81E.1040105@tampabay.rr.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-doc@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-doc@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.135 (Tomorrow I'll Wake Up and Scald Myself with Tea; GIT 51ee292 /st/portage/src/egit-src/pan2) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: ca39fc01-edfd-4369-a7c3-ac331c644a19 X-Archives-Hash: d4c5621bfdc0bd1484c3d90a6d5ce1e2 wireless posted on Tue, 29 Nov 2011 10:19:58 -0500 as excerpted: > On 11/29/11 08:01, Sven Vermeulen wrote: >=20 >> I don't consider this as a "problem" per se, so I don't think we need >> to put much effort in these things. Licenses evolve; documents too. >> Eventually, old(er) documents will be replaced with newer ones anyhow. >> And it is not that the 2.5 license has a major issue for us - it's jus= t >> that 3.0 is somewhat newer and used on the wiki. >=20 > This issue is even simpler than that. Just assume the authors (owners?) > are not going to say anything. If one or 2 do, resolve the issue > individually, or pull the doc. After all, when was the last time there > was an issue of this sort? Adding to swift/SV's reply, as he said, the laws don't work like that, =20 and we /really/ don't want to go there, even if we /might/ /arguably/ be=20 able to get away with it for some or all of the docs. And addressing the "last time there was an issue of this sort" question,=20 there was a bit (well, potentially more than a bit, but it was resolved=20 before it went nuclear) of a hubbub around a document with some major=20 work by a former dev, some years ago. In that case, it was simply that=20 he had been taken out of the "authors" list at the top/side, while still=20 credited in a footnote along with all the other contributors, the=20 reasoning behind the action being that for layout reasons, it made more=20 sense to put the current primary contact up at the top, with the rest of=20 the contributors still acknowledged but that acknowledgment moved=20 elsewhere. I believe the issue was resolved by essentially reverting the change. But given the hubbub that caused when it was simply moving a name=20 around... no, we don't want to TOUCH the whole license change without=20 explicit permission thing, and I'd argue, rightly so. As ESR pointed out= =20 quite effectively in his cathedral and the bazaar series of essays and=20 book, the FLOSS community functions as a meritocratic gifting society,=20 with the primary currency being respect based on acknowledge=20 contributions to the community, and anything that messes with that=20 acknowledgment and respect is, in effect, either robbery or community=20 currency manipulation. For some people, therefore, changing such things=20 without direct permission is akin to robbing them at gunpoint, not a=20 small matter, indeed, and even if you believe the ESR stuff is all a=20 bunch of hooey, recognizing the value some others in the community place=20 on it can in practice save quite some community controversy at best, or=20 ultimately, legal trouble if it goes nuclear! (I deliberately avoided names and explicit detail as it's long settled=20 now tho the issue remains a sensitive one for some, so no need to drag=20 out the details, but they're available in the gentoo list archives. =20 Additionally, the historic details aren't apropos for current list=20 discussion, so please take anything further on that line offlist.) --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman