licence (was: What's going on with the Packaging Handbook project)

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Davide Truffa <davide at catoblepa.org> [2007.09.05.1604 +0200]:
> > 6) We must yet reach a consensus about the license (GPLv2?). Martin and 
> > Davide, please get this done as soon as possible! :-))
> GPLv2 or later is a good choice for me, I don't understand a pin
> at v2 only. Do we really want discourage the use of GPLv3 ;)

I consider GPL2 viral and GPL3 even more so. Moreover, it's hardly
a licence for documentation, IMHO.

Anyway, I am not the one to decide this and I will help out
independently of the licence.

But I would like to ask Davide to provide — just for the record
— his reasons for choice of GPL2/3 vs. the CC nc-by-sa 2.5 or 3.0
licence.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck at debian.org>
: :'  :  proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
there's an old proverb that says just about whatever you want it to.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/packaging-handbook-project/attachments/20070905/6380c9d7/attachment.pgp