+1 On 03/20/2014 01:43 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:

++

On Mar 20, 2014 9:12 PM, Russell Bryant <rbryant@redhat.com> wrote:

...

On 03/20/2014 01:06 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:

...

The Nova project is looking to move the content of design specifications to a git repository for the Juno development cycle [1]. The contents of this repository will not be code. It will primarily be documentation.

Right now we put the Apache 2 LICENSE file in the repository and have the same license header in the template used for specifications.

http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova-specs/tree/LICENSE http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova-specs/tree/template.rst

Is this licensing the proper choice here? If not, what should we use instead?

Thanks,

[1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-March/030576.html

To possibly answer my own question ...

I found in a previous thread that the board officially approved using CC-BY for documentation here:

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/15Oct2012BoardMinutes#....

So perhaps we should be using that since this is effectively documentation? I also expect that this content be used heavily when developing the official project documentation based on the features described in these specifications.

-- Russell Bryant

_______________________________________________ legal-discuss mailing list legal-discuss@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-discuss

_______________________________________________ legal-discuss mailing list legal-discuss@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-discuss

-- Sean Dague http://dague.net