[Koha] Licensing on koha-community.org

[Nicole Engard]

I'll fix the license on the manual ASAP

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Liz Rea <lrea at nekls.org> wrote:
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Koha mailing list
> Koha at lists.katipo.co.nz
> http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
>