Talk:Policies/Licensing Policy

Jump to: navigation, search


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
license comparison online website023:12, 2 December 2012
GFDL 1.2 is listed twice116:43, 30 January 2012

license comparison online website

I'm linking this here, though i'd prefer to see it on the main page, because i think it gives a good breakdown of what can and can't be done with licenses, etc.

and i also don't want to lose this website link ;)

Sreich (talk)23:12, 2 December 2012

GFDL 1.2 is listed twice

There are two identical bullets in §8 describing GFDL 1.2, they differ only in KDE approval. Why is that? Is it a way of legally saying that unapproved licenses are allowed?

Should it be assumed that documentation that bears no licensing metadata is GFDL?

Yecril71pl12:25, 25 January 2012

Versions of the FDL after 1.2 require e.V. approval - a safeguard since we cannot foresee future licenses.

Our license statements do need some clarification, and someone is already working on this, but since there are legal implications it isn't a quick job.

Annew16:43, 30 January 2012

This page was last modified on 19 June 2009, at 20:50. Content is available under Creative Commons License SA 4.0 unless otherwise noted.