1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
|
Return-Path: <tomz@freedommail.ch>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA4A483D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 27 Sep 2016 09:51:49 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mx-out01.mykolab.com (mx.kolabnow.com [95.128.36.1])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A765186
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 27 Sep 2016 09:51:48 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kolabnow.com
X-Spam-Score: -2.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received: from mx04.mykolab.com (mx04.mykolab.com [10.20.7.102])
by mx-out01.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E80C615EA
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:51:42 +0200 (CEST)
From: Tom <tomz@freedommail.ch>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:51:40 +0200
Message-ID: <2882300.70fluXe1Lh@garp>
In-Reply-To: <20160926184136.GA15752@fedora-21-dvm>
References: <CAAS2fgQ813Dfo3n9TKvoUMdhs+MGz=UABzRmY5UGJkoLGaFyZA@mail.gmail.com>
<20160926184136.GA15752@fedora-21-dvm>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 14:49:07 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed BIP-1 change removing OPL licensing
option.
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 09:51:49 -0000
On Monday 26 Sep 2016 14:41:36 Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Note how the OPL is significantly more restrictive than the Bitcoin Core
> license; not good if we can't ship documentation with the code.
Documentation and code can have different licenses, the sole existence of
various documentation licenses attests to that point.
Shipping your docs under a separate licence has never been a problem before,
so you don't have to worry that you can't ship documentation with code.
That said, I wrote my suggestion in reply to Luke's BIP2 revival which is a
more formal suggestion of a solution. Maybe you can ACK that one instead?
Last, in preparation of acceptance of BIP2 I changed the licence of my BIP to
be dual-licensed. Now its also available under a Creative Commons license.
Have a nice day!
|
