WhyDoTuts / CollaborativeDocumentation

This is a collection of documentation created to help software developers expand their skill set. Our aim is to help developers ease the transition between the 'Beginner->Intermediate->Professional' learning stages.
2 stars 0 forks source link

Choosing an Open Source License for the Project/Documentation/Code #2

Open jburns131 opened 9 years ago

jburns131 commented 9 years ago

Front Matter

Although we all are familiar with Open Source Licensing, I believe we should think about some of the finer points of licensing, especially since we will be creating/licensing documentation (which I've never licensed before), along with custom code/software examples.

Some Open Source Licenses suite code/software better, while some Open Source Licenses suite documentation better.

Project Entities

I feel we can separate the current structure of the project into four separate entities:

  1. The "Collaborative Documentation" Project (working title) as a whole
  2. The "CollaborativeDocumentation" Gihub Organization and repo(s)
  3. The documentation itself
  4. Contributed custom code/software examples

    Keeping Mindful

Questions we should ask ourselves regarding what to license:

  1. Should we use three separate licenses?
    • One for the project/repo
    • One for the documentation
    • One for code/software examples
  2. Should we:
    • Use a single license for both the project/repo and the documentation
    • While using separate a license for code/software examples
  3. Should we:
    • Not license the project/repo itself
    • License the documentation and code/software examples separately
  4. Should we go another route?

Questions we should ask ourselves about licensing in general:

  1. Do want to completely give everything away with limited/no rights?
  2. Do we want to allow or prevent others from using the projects contents commercially?
  3. Do we want to allow others to use/reference this material elsewhere?
  4. Do we want to allow others to use/reference this material with or without attribution?

    Resources

jburns131 commented 9 years ago

My quick thoughts on the matter:

I think this would be my vote(s) regarding the licenses used:

Project/Repo/Docs: I'm fine with these licenses:

Example Code/Software:

ShadMickelberry commented 9 years ago

I agree on the commercial work. I would just want to prevent someone from copying and pasting and then commercializing that work. In an effort not to re-create the wheel we will most likely be referencing a great deal of material that is already out there ie:

0100000101010011 commented 9 years ago

CC sounds about right

ShadMickelberry commented 9 years ago

Guess we need the group name before we finalize this in (Issue #3). I'm sure either GNU or Creative Commons would work fine. CC Seems easy to implement. Has a generator that I used to produces the tag below

Creative Commons License
WhyDoTuts by WhyDoTuts is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at https://github.com/WhyDoTuts/CollaborativeDocumentation.

ShadMickelberry commented 9 years ago

Guess GNU is just as easy. Just thinking of implementing in a published version (wiki) and code samples.

Copyright (C) YEAR YOUR NAME. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "GNU Free Documentation License".