Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Documentation Licensing (CC Attribution/Share Alike)

[Xavier Neys]

Duncan wrote:
> I was just reading a GLSA on the announce list, and noticed the
> Creative-Commons Attribution/Share-alike license at the bottom.  Why I
> clicked the link this time in particular I don't know, but I did...
>
> It seems the 2.0 version that Gentoo is currently using is now an older
> version.  There's a 2.5 version available.  I didn't notice anything
> different in the "human readable commons deed", and didn't click the link
> to the full legalese version to investigate further.  However, it's
> probably something the Gentoo legal folks (and core, I suppose, tho as I
> user I don't have access to that list, AFAIK, so I don't know for sure)
> need to be aware of, and consider switching to.
>
> Pardon me if it's come up before and/or is being dealt with, but I've not
> seen it covered yet here, and again, don't have access to core.  A quick
> bugs check didn't reveal anything either.

Our documentation is released under cc-by-sa 2.5, glsa's are not.

The original glsa's (xml versions) do not carry any license. If they had a 
<license/> tag which is allowed and processed, it would show as 2.5 on 
www.g.o. (the text does not mention the version, maybe it should, but the link 
points to the 2.5 one).

FYI, a glsa xml file is first transformed into a guidexml file, then 
transformed into html like any other doc.
The security team can either add a <license/> tag to their glsa's, we can even 
make it compulsory if they want to, or we can remove the test from the first 
transform and add a <license/> tag to all generated guidexml glsa's.

The license you noticed has been hardcoded in the XSL that transforms the glsa 
into the text version. It sould be updated.


Cheers,
-- 
/  Xavier Neys
\_ Gentoo Documentation Project
/  French & Internationalisation Lead
\  http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en
/\