Open Source Content License (OSCL) - Other/Miscellaneous licenses
ernest.prabhakar at gmail.com
Fri Apr 18 21:37:55 UTC 2008
On Apr 18, 2008, at 2:20 PM, Wilson, Andrew wrote:
> Even FSF, to my knowledge, never uses GPL for any of their
I agree. In fact, the only group I know that uses their source code
license for their documentation is FreeBSD, since the BSD license
works reasonably well for both. I'd encourage you to consider that as
your "default". If you do need to offer something stronger, though,
then Andy's suggestion probably makes the most sense.
- Ernie P.
> Using GPL, or any other SW license, for text strikes me
> as not a good idea. I would suggest the following: using a
> designed-for-text license for human-language documents,
> such as Creative Commons or GFDL, and a designed-for-code OSI approved
> license, such as GPL or BSD, for any computer-language code
> examples those documents contain. Specify the licensing scheme
> in the front matter for the document.
> IANAL, TINLA.
> Andy Wilson
> Intel open source technology center
More information about the License-review