Difference between revisions of "HaskellWiki:Community"
(added links to license texts) 
m (link fixed) 

Line 17:  Line 17:  
[[User:EinarKarttunenEinarKarttunen]] 03:12, 9 January 2006 (EST) 
[[User:EinarKarttunenEinarKarttunen]] 03:12, 9 January 2006 (EST) 

−  +  There's a quick discussion of the various licenses at [http://lwn.net/Articles/108250/ LWN]. 

I'll just note that if we start with a very liberal license, it can be tightened later. If we start with a restrictive license, there is no such option (short of contacting every author (or their heirs), and having them agree to it). 
I'll just note that if we start with a very liberal license, it can be tightened later. If we start with a restrictive license, there is no such option (short of contacting every author (or their heirs), and having them agree to it). 
Revision as of 09:18, 9 January 2006
Some useful pages: haskell.org, All Pages, External style sheet
Please copy stuff over from hawiki only if you own the copyright to it or it's licensed under the GNU FDL. Actually, don't at all until we've settled on a license. —Ashley Y 01:14, 9 January 2006 (EST)
Which license?
GFDL is more convenient if we wish to import material from Wikipedia. Most Haskell library code is available under BSD. Opinions? —Ashley Y 01:14, 9 January 2006 (EST)
I think the content has to be such that it is easy to add things to Haskell implementations and libraries. As fptools and GHC are under the BSD3 license having the wiki with a more restrictive license can create problems. EinarKarttunen 03:12, 9 January 2006 (EST)
There's a quick discussion of the various licenses at LWN.
I'll just note that if we start with a very liberal license, it can be tightened later. If we start with a restrictive license, there is no such option (short of contacting every author (or their heirs), and having them agree to it).
I don't care much for the FDL, it is too complex, and it's hard to grok how to deal with invariant sections, authorship (you are required to list at least five for derived works) etc. My vote would go to the OPL.