Perl 6 - the future is here, just unevenly distributed

IRC log for #rosettacode, 2011-10-27

| Channels | #rosettacode index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:51 dagnyscott joined #rosettacode
02:03 eMBee mikemol: (asuming multiple licenses are allowed) if i upload code under the GPL, then your modifications also need to be under the GPL. the crucial point is to make this clear to every contributor. i think if the license is prominently displayed, then when i make an edit, i know which license it should be.
02:05 eMBee the [[Rosetta Code:Copyrights]] even states that exemptions to the FDL can be made for using code verbatim. but if a contributor does not license his changes under the same exemptions, the whole exemtion becomes moot
02:05 fedaykin http://rosettacode.org/wik​i/Rosetta_Code:Copyrights
02:06 eMBee so this is already a problem now
02:06 eMBee because i can not asume anymore that the exemption someone makes is actually valid. i'd have to verify that noone made any changes
02:10 eMBee so tagging the license would be helpful already to track any existing exemtions
02:13 eMBee so without changing the rules, i'd like to create a licenses category and instructions that in order to add an exception a solution needs to be tagged with the license. but i think a new template is needed for that. i have no idea how to do that, so i don't know if i can get it done.
02:18 eMBee so without changing the rules, i'd like to create a licenses category and instructions that in order to add an exception a solution needs to be tagged with the license. but i think a new template is needed for that. i have no idea how to do that, so i don't know if i can get it done.
02:18 eMBee ooops
02:21 eMBee what do you think? this won't solve the question of migrating to a new license, but it would at least be helpful to make multiple licenses clear, and people could then eg go to Category:GPL and find all GPL solutions.
02:23 eMBee if you don't mind then i'd like to put this proposal on [[Rosetta_Code_talk:Copyrights]]
02:23 fedaykin http://rosettacode.org/wiki/​Rosetta_Code_talk:Copyrights
02:24 eMBee but since this is a sensitive topic i'd rather ask you first to avoid stirring up something that is to much trouble...
02:40 mwn3d_phone joined #rosettacode
02:42 mikemol eMBee: The key problem is that *all* contributions are licensed under the GFDL. Any other licenses are additional.
02:45 mikemol But, yes. Excemptions are functionally invalid.
02:45 mikemol (Or, at the very least, require a lot of work to verify)
02:50 eMBee that's my point. i don't want to change the fact that other licenses are additional, but i do want to make it easier to verify which solutions have additional licenses, and i'd like to add a rule that: if a solution is tagged with an additional license then all changes must be under that license as well
02:53 eMBee this will only be useful for new solutions. for any old solution, whoever wants to add such a tag needs to track down the contributions made by others, which will be just as hard work as it is already now
02:53 eMBee but then it would only need to be done once, and future users can benefit from that
04:00 mwn3d_phone joined #rosettacode
11:48 mwn3d_phone1 joined #rosettacode
13:16 dagnyscott joined #rosettacode
13:24 dagnyscott joined #rosettacode
13:53 GlitchMr joined #rosettacode
15:26 kpreid joined #rosettacode
18:12 mwn3d_phone joined #rosettacode
20:00 kpreid joined #rosettacode
21:22 mikemol eMBee: If we had a system which was able to keep track of page licenses individually (our ideal semantic setup could do that, for example), then I'd almost be OK with that.
21:22 kpreid joined #rosettacode
21:23 mikemol In such a system, I'd want an example author to be able to tack on a secondary license. It'd still be dual-licensed. One license would be the site license, the other would be whatever the example author chose to put the license under.
21:24 mikemol In all honesty, though, making licensing a nearly-working matter opens a different can of worms. You'd get cases where people would reimplement examples (perhaps well, perhaps poorly) out of purely philosophical motives; they didn't like the license the existing code was under.
21:26 mikemol The prospect of antisocial behavior over BSD vs GPL{2,3} vs LGPL vs CC-By vs CC-By-Nc vs CC-By-Sa vs CC-By-Nc-Sa vs CC-By-Sa...well, I anticipate it and fear such a thing.
21:26 mikemol If I could, I'd say "the whole thing's CC-By. End of the matter."
21:27 slavik1 cc-by?
21:27 mikemol Attribution. No further requirements.
21:27 slavik1 so bsd
21:27 slavik1 isn't that bsd
21:27 mikemol I think the BSD license does functionally the same thing.
21:27 mikemol CC-By is the Creative Commons-maintained equivalent.
21:28 slavik1 yea, that much I know ;)
21:28 mikemol Goes through revisions, rewordings, portings to other international legal codes...
21:28 mikemol But, yeah. I'm inclined to prefer CC-By over BSD, just because CC-By is "actively maintained", so to speak. :)
21:32 * Hypftier never really tried licensing code under CC, though. Don't really know why.
22:13 mwn3d_phone1 joined #rosettacode
22:24 kpreid joined #rosettacode
22:28 mwn3d_phone joined #rosettacode
23:09 kpreid joined #rosettacode
23:19 mwn3d_phone1 joined #rosettacode

| Channels | #rosettacode index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary