[Koha] Licensing on koha-community.org

[Liz Rea]

Ok, the Documentation definitely needs to be GPL2+. And the content/press type stuff really ought to be very loosely licensed for wide dispersion. So if you (someone out there with a gift for wording) would like to get me some verbiage to describe that setup, I'll be happy to make it so on the site. 

Thanks for the input, everybody.

Liz Rea
NEKLS
On Feb 8, 2010, at 8:07 AM, Galen Charlton wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 3:54 PM, MJ Ray <mjr at phonecoop.coop> wrote:
>> 1. much of the other Koha-related materials are under GPL2+, so we
>> should license the community website under the same terms, so all
>> the explanations and arguments made before still apply and we don't
>> have to think about it too much; OR
> 
> Licensing under GPL2+ would be my preference for "permanent" content
> such as documentation - but see below.
> 
>> 2. we consider that stuff on the community website is advertising that
>> should be spread as widely as possible, so we put it under a really
>> liberal license like No Problem Bugroff, WTFPL, MIT/Expat or anything
>> else compatible with GPL2+ (just in case it ends up in Koha itself).
> 
> I'd be happy with a more liberal license such MIT for things like the
> news and events postings.  Can we do both, or would that be too
> confusing?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Galen
> -- 
> Galen Charlton
> gmcharlt at gmail.com