[Haskell] Re: License for haskell.org content

[Jean-Philippe Bernardy]

We could also use multi licensing. A possibility is to have, by
default, everything licensed at the same time under BSD, CC, FDL and
GPL.

(For those who wonder, this suggestion is serious /and/ sarcastic at
the same time)

Cheers,
JP.

On 1/9/06, Ian Lynagh <igloo at earth.li> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 10:16:45PM -0800, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
> > In article <20060109030328.GA4611 at matrix.matrix.chaos.earth.li>,
> >  Ian Lynagh <igloo at earth.li> wrote:
> >
> > > Why not use the GPL, then?
> > >
> > > FWIW, the GFDL is considered non-free by Debian[1], so that would mean
> > > any documentation or anything derived from the wiki couldn't be packaged
> > > for Debian.
> > >
> > > Apart from the issue of code itself on the wiki, that other people have
> > > already mentioned, presumably you'd also have licence fun if you try to
> > > take surrounding explanatory text to use as haddock docs etc.
> >
> > Let's discuss it on the wiki:
> > <http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>
>
> I don't know if there was a reason you chose my message in particular to
> reply to, but I have no intention of discussing this, or anything else,
> on a wiki.
>
> Incidentally, if anyone's collecting votes/opinions, I'd vote "yes" for
> any of GPL, BSD, PD, and "no" for any other licence I can think of.
>
> (I am unlikely to directly contribute anything to the wiki ATM, though).
>
>
> Thanks
> Ian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell mailing list
> Haskell at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
>