There is a difference between the "content" and the "code"
"Content" should be considered licenced as Creative Commons..
"Code" should be licenced as LGPL
Ludovic
Le 01/02/10 10:46, Sergiu Dumitriu a écrit :
Hi devs,
I just noticed that although we've been saying that "This wiki is
licensed under a Creative Commons 2.0 license", all the source files for
the wiki pages are actually under the LGPL, which contradicts the wiki.
So, there are three possible choices:
- change the default copyright notice
- change the license of the applications
- don't change anything, implying that the CC applies only to new
content inserted by the user
Personally I prefer to keep all the wiki content as CC, since LGPL is
not exactly suited for content. However, since most of the default wiki
pages are actually code pages, we could say that they consist mostly of
code, which could go under the LGPL.
As a side note, we should be more specific about which kind of Creative
Commons is that, BY, SA, NC...
--
Ludovic Dubost
Blog:
http://blog.ludovic.org/
XWiki:
http://www.xwiki.com
Skype: ldubost GTalk: ldubost