Closed tingerrr closed 3 months ago
is there a specific reason for CC BY over CC BY-SA? At least superficially, it seems similar to MIT vs GPL (enforcing the same license on downstream adaptors). With documentation style content, the SA restriction seems fairly harmless compared to copyleft on code.
Basically: is allowing/preventing the guidelines being remixed into non-CC works a bug or a feature?
My suggestion (over Discord) was just what felt to be the most harmless option. I don't really mind going with either license.
Since this is not a package or library of any kind, I think it's fine to require derivatives of the work to be shared under the same terms. Ideally, if someone feels like forking and fixing all my typos, the community should benefit from the improved work.
That is, if I understood the SA clause correctly. The wording implies that derivatives must be shared, but I'm not sure if this implies must be shared with the public.
Sure
Good for me too!
A suggestion by @PgBiel was
CC-BY 4.0
.