Open-source style guide

[Karsten Wade]

On Sun, Sep 05, 2010 at 08:03:42PM -0400, Eric Sparks Christensen wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 19:34, Ruediger Landmann <r.landmann at redhat.com> wrote:
> >  On 09/05/2010 04:43 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
> >>
> >> The good news is that the Fedora Style Guide ...
> >>
> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs_Project_Style_Guide
> >>
> >> ... has a reasonably simple copyright history, I believe.  Looking at
> >> the history, the bulk of the work was done by Patrick Barnes on the
> >> MoinMoin wiki, and only a few of them have shown any edits since then
> >> that seem significant enough to be copyright works.  I see fewer than
> >> a half-dozen names that might just be happy to relicense their
> >> materials directly.
> >
> > You're spot-on. Having reviewed the contributions, there are few enough
> > contributors that approaching them individually should not be a problem.
> > Since you're one of them, Karsten, are you happy to relicense your
> > contibutions as CC-BY?
> >
> > Cheers
> > Rudi
> >
> >
> 
> Let's make sure this gets CC'd to the Docs list, please.

== Summary ==

Probably yes, after discussion.

== TLDR[0] ==

In general, I'm the type that prefers the copyleft-style, meaning, I
prefer when the license explicitly requires that modifications be
contributed back (or at least, released openly).

For that reason, I'd like to take the breath to contemplate this,
along with the other copyright holders.  In the end, I'm likely to
say, "Yes," but I need to embrace or get over my reservations.

It would be helpful to have any insight from e.g. Richard Fontana or
Tom Callaway -- not as legal advise but just a general discussion on
the topic.  I'll note that while the new Fedora Project Contributor
Agreement (FPCA)[1] provides the non-copyleft MIT license as default
for non-licensed contributions, it prefers the CC BY SA for content.
Interestingly, Richard reveals that one of the reasons for that is
because we use it already in Docs and the wiki.[2]

What I think I'm looking for is a good discussion of the merits and
pitfalls (positives and negatives) so we are making an informed
decision.  IMO, as a copyleft preferrer in general, I like to make
*that* the default and justify a non-copyleft license.  This
discussion serves as the justification.

- Karsten

[0] http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/TLDR
[1] Latest I can find is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Revised_Fedora_CLA_Draft
[2] http://opensource.com/law/10/6/new-contributor-agreement-fedora

-- 
name:  Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
team:                Red Hat Community Architecture 
uri:               http://TheOpenSourceWay.org/wiki
gpg:                                       AD0E0C41
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/docs/attachments/20100906/2300aae2/attachment.bin