[postgis-users] PostGIS documentation license

[Paragon Corporation]

Mathieu,

Thanks.  I think I like the FreeBSD one better now that I'm thinking about
it. My only care is the crediting of PostGIS project if other
projects/software (whether open source or private)
benefit from our documentation.

Greg,

Regarding GPL.   Mostly I just find the whole licensing confusing.  I don't
think I'm the only one who would be happier if PostGIS was under a BSD/MIT
or some other licensing.  Mostly just for the headache of arguing about what
you can and can't do with it for commercial purposes.

So only difference with the documentation is that the licensing was never
really defined so easier to change and also I think slightly fewer hands on
it so sign-off is a little easier.

Thanks,
Regina

-----Original Message-----
From: postgis-users-bounces at postgis.refractions.net
[mailto:postgis-users-bounces at postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Mathieu
Basille
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 3:27 PM
To: postgis-users at postgis.refractions.net
Subject: Re: [postgis-users] PostGIS documentation license

Dear Regina,

Did you consider the GNU Free Documentation License or the FreeBSD 
Documentation License? They might be more appropriate for a 
documentation compared to a CC licence (aimed for more general purposes).

In particular, they both allow for derivative and/or commercial use. The 
GNU FDL would be more restrictive (with a 'share-alike' clause), and 
allows for 'invariant sections' which are sometimes useful in a software 
documentation if you want to be sure that specific parts remain 
unchanged. The FreeBSD DL is far more permissive and basically 
corresponds to an 'attribution' clause only.

You can find more details on the web, e.g. on Wikipedia [1, 2].
All the best,
Mathieu


[1] 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License#Compatibility_wi
th_Creative_Commons_licensing_terms

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeBSD_Documentation_License



Le 26/07/2011 15:03, Paragon Corporation a écrit :
> As several have pointed out the PostGIS documentation does not have a
> clearly defined license assigned to it. This is one of the items on our
> todo to finish off our OSGeo incubation process.
>
> Having it full under GPL like the rest of PostGIS is very unappealing to
me.
>
> I would prefer it be under a fairly unrestricted license such as:
>
> Creative Common Attribution ShareAlike – something like this:
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/
>
> And if people happen to make money off of adaptations, printed copies of
> it etc, more power to them.
>
> Do others have any issues, concerns, comments, preferences about this?
>
> I guess people who actually worked on the documentation should be the
> primary ones to decide.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Regina
>
> http://www.postgis.us <http://www.postgis.us/>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-users mailing list
> postgis-users at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users

-- 

~$ whoami
Mathieu Basille, Post-Doc

~$ locate
Laboratoire d'Écologie Comportementale et de Conservation de la Faune
+ Centre d'Étude de la Forêt
Département de Biologie
Université Laval, Québec

~$ info
http://ase-research.org/basille

~$ fortune
``If you can't win by reason, go for volume.''
Calvin, by Bill Watterson.
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
postgis-users at postgis.refractions.net
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users