| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Quoting Richard Fontana in [1]:
CC0 has been listed by Fedora as a 'good' license for code and content
(corresponding to allowed and allowed-content under the new system). We plan
to classify CC0 as allowed-content only, so that CC0 would no longer be
allowed for code.
Over a long period of time a consensus has been building in FOSS that
licenses that preclude any form of patent licensing or patent forbearance
cannot be considered FOSS. CC0 has a clause that says: "No trademark or
patent rights held by Affirmer are waived, abandoned, surrendered, licensed
or otherwise affected by this document." (The trademark side of that clause
is nonproblematic from a FOSS licensing norms standpoint.) The regular
Creative Commons licenses have similar clauses.
For the case of our documentation snippets, patent issues do not matter much.
But it is always nicer to have a license that is considerred acceptable without
any further considerations. So let's change the license to the (now recommended
replacement) MIT-0.
[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/NO7KGDNL5GX3KCB7T3XTGFA3QPSUJA6R/
Using 'git blame -b' and 'git log -p --follow', I identified the following
folks as having made non-trivial changes to those snippets:
Lennart Poettering
Tom Gundersen
Luca Bocassi
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
Thomas Mühlbacher
Daan De Meyer
I'll ask for confirmation in the pull request.
|
