Signed-off-by: Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com>
---
There have been some concerns with the license of the specification and
the ownership of changes submitted. In practice, things generally work,
but for tidiness we should probably switch to a better license.
The original intent was to prevent vendor extensions, but I think it's
probably a moot point to enforce this via licensing the spec; it's
easily worked around from a legal POV.
The following is a complete list of contributors, and therefore
copyright holders, to the specification:
Adnan Maolood <me@adnano.co>
Alexey Yerin <yyp@disroot.org>
Alona Enraght-Moony <code@alona.page>
Andrew Hodges <betawaffle@gmail.com>
Armin Weigl <tb46305@gmail.com>
Autumn! <autumnull@posteo.net>
Bor Grošelj Simić <bgs@turminal.net>
Carlos Une <une@fastmail.fm>
Chloe Brown <chloe.brown.00@outlook.com>
Conrad Hoffmann <ch@bitfehler.net>
Dmitry Matveyev <public@greenfork.me>
Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com>
Ember Sawady <ecs@d2evs.net>
Eyal Sawady <ecs@d2evs.net>
Jakob S. Bertelsen <mail@jakob.dev>
Joe Finney <me@spxtr.net>
Josiah Frentsos <jfrent@tilde.team>
Lorenz (xha) <me@xha.li>
Mallory Adams <malloryadams@fastmail.com>
Mike Eichler <mike@mykolab.ch>
Nicholas Rodrigues Lordello <n@lordello.net>
Nixon Enraght-Moony <nixon.emoony@gmail.com>
Pierre Curto <pierre.curto@gmail.com>
Robert 'Probie' Offner <probie@fastmail.com>
Sebastian <sebastian@sebsite.pw>
Sebastiano Tronto <sebastiano@tronto.net>
Sudipto Mallick <smlckz@disroot.org>
Thomas Bracht Laumann Jespersen <t@laumann.xyz>
Umar Getagazov <umar@handlerug.me>
Vicente Bergas <vicencb@gmail.com>
Vlad-Stefan Harbuz <vlad@vladh.net>
spxtr <me@spxtr.net>
witcher <witcher@wiredspace.de>
Everyone listed here is in the CC. Please reply with your consent to
relicense your work under the GNU FDL.
I will apply the license change with 2/3rds approval from this list. The
copyright situation is a little bit complex if anyone were to object,
but I don't think anyone will, and if they do we can just rewrite the
copyrightable portions of their changes (i.e. non-copyrightable:
grammar, semantics; copyrightable: natural-language explanations).
introduction.tex | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/introduction.tex b/introduction.tex
index 6f8a4b1..e76860f 100644
--- a/introduction.tex+++ b/introduction.tex
@@ -20,8 +20,8 @@ The abstract and appendices are informative.
\textcopyright\ Drew DeVault, Ember Sawady, et al., 2020--2024
-\informative{This document is licensed under the terms of CC-BY-ND. Free-redistribution of this document is permitted, but derivative works are not-allowed. Software which implements this specification are not considered-derivative works; you may freely apply this specification as such without-restriction.}+\informative{This document is licensed under the terms of the GNU Free+Documentation License (GNU FDL). The license applies only to the text,+implementations of this specification are not subject to any copyright+limitations in their application of the semantics, procedures, and other+details described herein.}
--
2.45.1
i really don't like this license and i don't understand how it works,
for example:
- "You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute."
- Invariant sections
- The weird part with printing
... it's too complicated for me. i suggest simpler non-copyleft licenses
such as ISC or WTFPL.
ANYWAYS i only authored a small part and you know what you're doing, so OK.
On Mon May 27, 2024 at 1:29 PM CEST, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> - "You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the> reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute."
This means "don't add DRM"
> - Invariant sections
Should not be applicable today but it could in fact be useful if we want
to add a page establishing the provenance and guidelines for use (e.g.
you cannot modify the spec without leaving in place a page which says
where it came from and that we'd prefer not to have vendor extensions or
whatever).
> - The weird part with printing
I don't find this particularly weird.
I only authored small, non-copyrightable parts around the grammar.
Nevertheless, I'm happy to relicense. Using CC-BY-ND always seemed weird
to me.
It's probably worth being explicit about which version of the GFDL we're
using, but I trust you to get the details right.
On Mon, 27 May 2024, at 12:49, Drew DeVault wrote:
> Everyone listed here is in the CC. Please reply with your consent to> relicense your work under the GNU FDL.
I consent to this!
On Mon May 27, 2024 at 11:49 AM BST, Drew DeVault wrote:
> Everyone listed here is in the CC. Please reply with your consent to> relicense your work under the GNU FDL.
I consent.
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 12:54 PM Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com> wrote:
> Please reply with your consent to> relicense your work under the GNU FDL.
I consent.
I consent.
On Mon May 27, 2024 at 6:49 AM EDT, Drew DeVault wrote:
> The original intent was to prevent vendor extensions, but I think it's> probably a moot point to enforce this via licensing the spec; it's> easily worked around from a legal POV.
Honestly I really wish CC-BY-ND would work lol, since that would imply
that implementors actually specified their extensions, which, for
implementing hare-c, would be really fucking useful. But yeah, given
that they don't, I see no reason to not change the license.
Hello,
I consent to the change of license.
(However, I have only contributed once with minor fixes, and just lurked
in the mailing list since then. I am not sure it makes sense for my name
to appear in this list. I have nothing against being listed here though.)
Best regards,
Sebastiano Tronto
I have merged this change, after sorting out a few more approvals in
private. The specification is now licensed under the GNU FDL.
To git@git.sr.ht:~sircmpwn/hare-specification
51b310f..645572c master -> master