[Maria-docs] Mixing GPL licensed material into our documentation
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Daniel Bartholomew dbart@askmonty.org wrote:
On 12/05/2010, at 9:12 PM, Paul McCullagh paul.mccullagh@primebase.org wrote:
Paul> You are free to copy any part of the primebase.org documentation Paul> to askmonty.org. Paul> Paul> It is not stated, but in general our documentation is also GPL. I Paul> will add this to our Web-site.
Paul,
Thank you for licensing the documentation under the GPL and letting us use it!
Hmm... this reminds me:
We've decided to use a combo of GFDL and CC BY-SA for our documentation licenses.
Copying in documentation that is GPL licensed is probably not possible, I'm sure the GPL is incompatible with at least CC BY-SA.
I'm not even concerned of the PBXT docs, I'm sure Paul would be flexible. But I just realized we also use the MySQL help files, which surely are GPL and we haven't seen much signs of MySQL being active in relicensing their docs ;-)
This raises the question whether we should actually use GPL only as the license for our manual? It is copyleft too, so a workable choice even if it is "awkward" for literary works.
A key question would be how much will we lose (such as in man-days of effort) if we just take away the MySQL help files from the manual?
henrik
Hi Henrik,
As I mentioned, I have changed the license to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
I assume this is compatible with the license of the MariaDB documentation.
However, that does not help you with the MySQL parts, as you say...
On Jun 3, 2010, at 10:09 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote:
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Daniel Bartholomew <dbart@askmonty.org
wrote: On 12/05/2010, at 9:12 PM, Paul McCullagh paul.mccullagh@primebase.org wrote:
Paul> You are free to copy any part of the primebase.org documentation Paul> to askmonty.org. Paul> Paul> It is not stated, but in general our documentation is also GPL. I Paul> will add this to our Web-site.
Paul,
Thank you for licensing the documentation under the GPL and letting us use it!
Hmm... this reminds me:
We've decided to use a combo of GFDL and CC BY-SA for our documentation licenses.
Copying in documentation that is GPL licensed is probably not possible, I'm sure the GPL is incompatible with at least CC BY-SA.
I'm not even concerned of the PBXT docs, I'm sure Paul would be flexible. But I just realized we also use the MySQL help files, which surely are GPL and we haven't seen much signs of MySQL being active in relicensing their docs ;-)
This raises the question whether we should actually use GPL only as the license for our manual? It is copyleft too, so a workable choice even if it is "awkward" for literary works.
A key question would be how much will we lose (such as in man-days of effort) if we just take away the MySQL help files from the manual?
henrik -- email: henrik.ingo@avoinelama.fi tel: +358-40-5697354 www: www.avoinelama.fi/~hingo book: www.openlife.cc
-- Paul McCullagh PrimeBase Technologies www.primebase.org www.blobstreaming.org pbxt.blogspot.com
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Paul McCullagh paul.mccullagh@primebase.org wrote:
Hi Henrik,
As I mentioned, I have changed the license to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
I assume this is compatible with the license of the MariaDB documentation.
Kind of. If you ask us for advice, we would actually like you to dual license: use both that CC license AND GFDL. We looked into this last year, found out this is what wikipedia does, and essentially learned that there is no one great documentation license, but doing this kind of dual licensing gives you a pretty good result. (http://askmonty.org/wiki/Askmonty.org:Copyrights#Why_the_dual_license.3F)
That being said, the arrangement allows to take in single pages that are only under one of those licenses, if it is not possible to reach the author or agree on a change.
However, that does not help you with the MySQL parts, as you say...
No. Grr...
henrik
On Jun 3, 2010, at 11:21 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Paul McCullagh paul.mccullagh@primebase.org wrote:
Hi Henrik,
As I mentioned, I have changed the license to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
I assume this is compatible with the license of the MariaDB documentation.
Kind of. If you ask us for advice, we would actually like you to dual license: use both that CC license AND GFDL.
That's OK with me. But, as far as I can tell, there is nothing stopping some from taking CC content, and incorporating it in a GFDL document.
We looked into this last year, found out this is what wikipedia does, and essentially learned that there is no one great documentation license, but doing this kind of dual licensing gives you a pretty good result. (http://askmonty.org/wiki/Askmonty.org:Copyrights#Why_the_dual_license.3F )
That being said, the arrangement allows to take in single pages that are only under one of those licenses, if it is not possible to reach the author or agree on a change.
However, that does not help you with the MySQL parts, as you say...
No. Grr...
henrik
-- email: henrik.ingo@avoinelama.fi tel: +358-40-5697354 www: www.avoinelama.fi/~hingo book: www.openlife.cc
-- Paul McCullagh PrimeBase Technologies www.primebase.org www.blobstreaming.org pbxt.blogspot.com
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Paul McCullagh paul.mccullagh@primebase.org wrote:
On Jun 3, 2010, at 11:21 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Paul McCullagh paul.mccullagh@primebase.org wrote:
Hi Henrik,
As I mentioned, I have changed the license to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
I assume this is compatible with the license of the MariaDB documentation.
Kind of. If you ask us for advice, we would actually like you to dual license: use both that CC license AND GFDL.
That's OK with me. But, as far as I can tell, there is nothing stopping some from taking CC content, and incorporating it in a GFDL document.
Ah, it seems even the Askmonty guidelines say exactly that :-) (It is the other way that you can't do it)
henrik
participants (2)
-
Henrik Ingo -
Paul McCullagh