changing content licenses (OPL => CC BY SA)

[Robert 'Bob' Jensen]

----- "Karsten Wade" <kwade at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Yes, that content injection began this January/February.  For
> example,
> the expanded Fedora Installation Guide inherited a ton of content
> from
> the RHT team.  The new Security Guide and the SELinux Guide are
> similar.
> 
> We switched from the GFDL to the OPL because it was a better license
> and would let us get work from e.g. RHT.  At that time, we had
> several
> discussions with RHT Legal, who at the time were concerned about some
> items in the CC licenses (1.1 or something) that have since been
> ironed out or resolved.
> 
> Luis' reply in the correct one -- we gain immensely from joining a
> wider content commons.  I think the OPL's author's comments in the
> threads I referenced are poignant, too.
> 
> Not at all.
> 

Based this explanation from Karsten I would have no remaining objections or questions about the change as long as the logistics are handled in the best way possible creating the least amount of ill feeling from our community. I think the community and contributors should be shown respect by sending out a form mass email to each directly, responses not required because of the CLA.

-- Bob

------------------------------------------------------------------------
|       Robert 'Bob' Jensen        ||       Fedora Unity Founder       |
|       bob at fedoraunity.org        ||      http://fedoraunity.org/     |
|                   http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/                   |
|                http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen                |
------------------------------------------------------------------------