On Saturday 26 May 2007 16:47:20 John Doty wrote:
> For software, I think GPL is it.
>
> But what about documentation? This is very important, indeed it's the
> bulk of the project! GFDL? Creative Commons?
>
> Then there are schematic files, symbols, etc. I'll publish gschem
> files, but also derived files (netlist, graphics, BOM) for those not
> using gEDA (no accounting for taste ;-). What license makes sense for
> these?
I actually think there's nothing particularly objectionable about using GPL
for the lot. It's (a) well-understood, (b) guarantees that the design stays
Free (and there's nothing stopping you re-licensing it closed, since you're
the copyright holder) and (c) ensures that there's no ambiguity about which
part of the design is under which license.
Just my €0.02 worth.
Peter
--
Fisher Society http://tinyurl.com/o39w2
CU Small-Bore Club http://tinyurl.com/mwrc9
09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0 peter-b.co.uk
Attachment:
pgp25gKoDIfEL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user