On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 19:04 -0400, Hubert Figuiere wrote: > > License: > > > > What kind of license should be used (for the code and more important, the > > database)? A GPL like license to restrict usage to open source software or > > a > > LGPL like license? Or a non-commercial license? Can code licences be applied > > to databases? > > Something like CC-SA. The "SA" (share alike) part is important as it > allow the database itself to be kept open. It should also be DFSG > (Debian Free Software Guidelines) compliant and GPL compatible (ie no > 'Non Commercial' clause, as this kind is usualy so fuzzy that it just > penalize Free Software). I don't think GPL can easily apply to such > database, but that give a rough idea of what we need in term of licensing.
GPL/LGPL are for source code. I would advocate using public domain for this data. Many in the open access movement and A2K advocate that data should be copyright free. Thus, I would agree, free this data. Otherwise CC BY. Also, wouldn't it make sense to make this part of the Create Shared Resource spec that we make packages for? And, it would also be great to match up the lens db with the icc profiles. Also, I would advocate fr keeping whatever system in plain text format rather than binary db. Jon > > Hub > _______________________________________________ > CREATE mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create -- Jon Phillips San Francisco, CA USA PH 510.499.0894 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rejon.org MSN, AIM, Yahoo Chat: kidproto Jabber Chat: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
