Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal

[Guylhem Aznar <guylhem@bigfoot.com>]

On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 09:42:27AM -0700, Poet/Joshua Drake wrote:
> There is no way we are going to make every one happy with this. I suggest
> we completely scrap the the biolerplate license. Were not laywers and we
> shouldn't pretend to be.

Fine with me

> My suggestion to list links to various licenses that are acceptable.
> 
> 1. OpenContent
> 2. OpenPublication

But do not accept the infamous options.

> 3. GFDL

> If anybody knows any other "documentation" licenses add them to the list.

fine

> We should state that if they do not like one of the above licenses then 
> they can write their own. If they write their own there should be some
> guidelines as to what is acceptable license for documents that will be
> included within the LDP.

... back to the boilerplate. Better remove the "contact the LDP"
obligation and replace it by "you should contact the LDP"

-- 
Guylhem P. Aznar                               http://www.linuxdoc.org
guylhem \@/ metalab.unc.edu                    http://www.iMedecin.com
"They who can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."  -----  Benjamin Franklin


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org