Releasing the OSM documentation under an 'Open Source' License...

[Cergorach]

I look in the Mambo help section and i don see under what license those docs are released, so i'm assuming that they aren released under and OS license (please correct me if i'm wrong). I would like to propose that the 'new' documentation project release all the documentation under a similar license as the software part (GNU GPL), i believe there's a GNU FDL (Free Document License) that would be appropriate (i'm not sure).

I think that if the Software is Open Source, so should the Documentation be. If something like this happens ever again you wouldn have to rewrite all the documentation....

All documentation released as official will be licenced open sourced on the new help site.

[ibnhafsun]

When?

AFAIK, that´s not happening (yet). Your official documentation is being produced and released under a non Open Source license. At least, I can´t find any Creative Commons licese @ the OSI and there are a lot of efforts and discussions on the -by -sa branch to make it compatible with Open Source licenses.

You are providing free (as a beer) official documentation (but limited by the user and the use of the document [the -nc clause]).

(Just trying to keep things clear, there´s no reason to claim that joomla! documentation is open sourced yet).

[brian]

its kind of hard for documentation to be anything other than open source. There arent exactly any hidden bits are there?

What you are really referring to is "freely distributable"

Whilst a CC licence does have some limits (which personaly I would rather do without) it does make the documentation freely distributable. It just means that no one can take the documentation and pub lish it commercialy without the authors permission.

Licensing Docs is not easy and is someting that all successful Open Source projects have difficulty with.

[ibnhafsun]

That´s your point of view, brian.

Anyway, try to put the CC -a, -nc, -sa license in any of the OSI approved licenses and, if you find one that fits, I will edit my post, right?

Freely is a word too big to use it with a CC -a, -nc, -sa, as you don´t have some kinds of the basics open source freedom. Of course I was talking about distribution, as the post said "all the documentation released".

As I said before, I was trying to keep things clear. We can´t say one thing and the opposite at the same time.

[brian]

Ah you are taaking the post by a forum user as an official statement??

[ibnhafsun]

Nope, and you?

« Last Edit: August 28, 2005, 11:15:51 PM by Michelle Bisson »

The post was edited by Michelle. Who is Michelle? What she does? Is she allowed to make, edit or ammend statements here?

[humvee]

As a matter of interest why re-open a post that is over a year old on a subject that you have already expressed your views elsewhere in the forum.

Your views are well known and well documented in these forums. There is currently an ongoing discussion with regard documentation licensing within the Core team.

Andy

[ibnhafsun]

Andy, and why to reply a post stating a wrong thing about, ie, a component?

I just found the post and I think it´s wrong. If you think so, edit it with the Documentation Team opinion. If you think it´s right, reply me and, as I said before, I will edit my post to reflect the reality.

I don´t want to see a user willing to know more about the official documentation reading "All documentation released as official will be licenced open sourced on the new help site." as I don´t like to see a user trying to find a component to use as a shop reading "You can do it with Docman".

That´s all.

[Cergorach]

Might i add that the quote bit is my original question, the bit under it is MichelleBissons comment, not mine. Strange that it was commented on that way...

[ibnhafsun]

Thanks for your clarification, Cergorach.

I guess Michelle was still learning and her edit was the only way she found to do it (I have many troubles with some forums features, so I can understand any mistake, lol).

As I said, my intention wasn´t to reopen a discussion. I was just trying to put things clear as I found this post trying to find a different one. That was all and I know the Doc. Team is trying to find the best solution not only to have free documentation, which is important, but better documentation too. The only thing I can do is trust them and try to help with a different point of view.