Switch to creative commons license

[hendricius]

After my discussion with @cedounet it seems most appropriate that we either convert the license to public domain or CC-BY-SA. Some details on the discussion here: http://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/9082/what-is-the-appropriate-license-for-open-source-content-which-i-might-publish-in.

What do you other contributors think? I want the license to be as open as possible. I don't care too much about the attribution as well. We could maybe remove it?

[cedounet]

I am fine with relicensing my contributions, CC-BY-SA. Personally, I would prefer to keep the SA but will be fine with whatever you decide

[fischerq]

No concerns here, please go with whatever you think is best. CC-BY-SA seems like a good choice, based on the recommendation for Wikipedia-like content (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/)

[hendricius]

@BaumgartNiklas @crankycyclops @ned-park @Hanso707 @cannontrodder @ralph @ndrsfel @burner @vesterbaek @antoviaque @JohnCMoon  @cedric-andrieu @kianmeng @neo1908 @gricardo99 @foxtacles @ry4nolson @joseabernardes @janwalz @jestemradek @AsterixxxGallier

Sorry that I am hijacking this PR to mention you. We have been discussing to change the license from MIT to CC-BY-SA, it could be better for a book project. If you think this is fine please drop a quick comment here on the PR. That would be highly appreciated!

Thank you, Hendrik

[hanclintonnyx]

No concerns here!

[ralph]

I'm not sure I ever contributed, but no concerns from me.

[BaumgartNiklas]

sounds good

[joseabernardes]

Whatever is best for you and the project! 👍

[Hanso707]

Sounds appropriate, go ahead :)

[foxtacles]

Sounds good!

[neo1908]

Happy with CC-BY-SA!

[crankycyclops]

Sounds good to me!

[vesterbaek]

👍

On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 17.23, James @.***> wrote:

Sounds good to me!

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/hendricius/the-sourdough-framework/pull/177#issuecomment-1693536068, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAELWTOMJHMYJ5RSY7RSKCTXXC7N5ANCNFSM6AAAAAA3SP2LEQ . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[burner]

@hendricius you are the boss of this one

[gricardo99]

sounds good!

[ndrsfel]

Sure thing, dough-kay! 💪

[ned-park]

I'm also fine with the license change.

[antoviaque]

It's a better license for this project, agreed! :+1:

[cedounet]

Thanks a lot guys, to summarize OK from: @BaumgartNiklas @crankycyclops @ned-park @antoviaque @ralph @ndrsfel @gricardo99 @cedric-andrieu @burner @vesterbaek @neo1908 @Hanso707 @foxtacles @joseabernardes @JohnCMoon @kianmeng

Still waiting from: @cannontrodder @ry4nolson @janwalz @jestemradek @AsterixxxGallier

[janwalz]

Sounds good!

On August 25, 2023, Hendrik Kleinwaechter @.***> wrote:

@BaumgartNiklas https://github.com/BaumgartNiklas @crankycyclops https://github.com/crankycyclops @ned-park https://github.com/ned-park @Hanso707 https://github.com/Hanso707 @cannontrodder https://github.com/cannontrodder @ralph https://github.com/ralph @ndrsfel https://github.com/ndrsfel @burner https://github.com/burner @vesterbaek https://github.com/vesterbaek @antoviaque https://github.com/antoviaque @JohnCMoon https://github.com/JohnCMoon @cedric-andrieu https://github.com/cedric-andrieu @kianmeng https://github.com/kianmeng @neo1908 https://github.com/neo1908 @gricardo99 https://github.com/gricardo99 @foxtacles https://github.com/foxtacles @ry4nolson https://github.com/ry4nolson @joseabernardes https://github.com/joseabernardes @janwalz https://github.com/janwalz @jestemradek https://github.com/jestemradek @AsterixxxGallier https://github.com/AsterixxxGallier

Sorry that I am hijacking this PR to mention you. We have been discussing to change the license from MIT to CC-BY-SA, it could be better for a book project. If you think this is fine please drop a quick comment here on the PR. That would be highly appreciated!

Thank you, Hendrik

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/hendricius/the-sourdough-framework/pull/177#issuecomment-1693408673, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGYQ3ZW4HJ4JETC2LE53ODXXCV4ZANCNFSM6AAAAAA3SP2LEQ . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[ry4nolson]

Works for me

[cedounet]

Any experts on CC-* licensing ?

I understand a logo with a link is enough like that. Or do I need to actually include the text in the pdf?

Thanks

[hendricius]

No expert - but I'd leave the logo and link.

[neo1908]

According to their website it looks like the image and link is fine

For offline material: Identify which license you wish to apply to your work and either (a) mark your work with a statement such as, “This work is licensed under the Creative Commons [insert description] License. To view a copy of the license, visit [insert url]”; or (b) insert the applicable license buttons with the same statement and URL link.

Usual disclaimer, I'm not an expert!

[cedounet]

Thanks.

I went for that, seems to confirm my understanding as well. So here we go:

@hendricius I would propose the following

• Assume everybody who did not complain to agree
• tag in git something like last MIT... just in case
• If someone complains we can always revert their contribution anyway... totally feasible now that most people did agree :)

LGTM

C/

[cedounet]

GTM when builds stop failing of course.

[cedounet]

Sorry 'bout that glitch. LGTM.