[Pkg-db-devel] Bug#256332: Clarification of redistribution
Mike Olson <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:51:08 -0400 (EDT)
I'm following up on a thread that's a month or so old, now. My
apologies for the delay in closing this out.
I was unsuccessful in getting the Commons folks to work with the FSF
on a GPL-compatible commons deed. While I believe that such a deed
would be in the interest of the community generally, I don't have the
time or throw weight to force the issue.
As a result, we'll abandon the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
license for Sleepycat's documentation.
Brian Sniffen, among others, suggested:
> The MIT/X11 license, the new BSD license, the Sleepycat license, and
> the GPL are all Free documentation licenses. Using the same license
> as your software makes it easy to copy examples and code snippets in
> one direction, and informative information into comments in the other.
We've consulted with our attorney, and agree that the simplest solution
is to use the identical license for the documentation and the code.
Accordingly, the next release of each of our products will use the
Sleepycat public license for the documentation.
I believe that this resolves the issue that Brian Carlson raised
on July 8, regarding problems including the Berkeley DB doc suite with
the Debian distribution.
Thanks for your time and patience. Please let me know if you have
any questions, or there is any additional follow-up necessary.