[OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] Please Vote on Evergreen Documentation Licensing

[Dan Scott]

On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 11:06 -0500, Karen Collier wrote:
> As discussed at the Documentation Interest Group Meeting on December, 9, 2009, I am calling for a vote on Documentation Licensing.  Members of the Documentation Interest Group and interested members of the Evergreen Community, please vote yes or no on the following proposals by Monday, January 4, 2009 by replying to this email on the Evergreen Documentation mailing list (open-ils-documentation at list.georgialibraries.org).
> 
> 1 - Official Evergreen Documentation produced by the Documentation Interest Group should be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/).
> 
> 2 - Any code included in the official documentation produced by the Documentation Interest Group should also be made available under the GNU GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html).
> 
> 3 - Official Evergreen Documentation may be made available under another copy-left (http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/copyleft.html) open source (http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd) license in the future with a majority vote on the Evergreen Documentation List (open-ils-documentation at list.georgialibraries.org) or comparable indication of the Evergreen community's wishes.
> 
> 4 - These same licensing terms should be applied to the Documentation Wiki.  Past contributors to the Documentation Wiki should be notified by emails sent to Evergreen community mailing lists and to the email address associated with their docuwiki account of the new licensing terms and given a reasonable amount of time to request that their contributions not be included under those licensing terms.
> 
> 5 - By submitting documentation to the Documentation wiki or to the Evergreen Documentation List after licensing terms have been decided and publicized, contributors indicate that they (a) agree to these licensing terms, and (b) to the best of their knowledge have the right to do so through copyright ownership, permission from the copyright owner(s), and/or the licensing terms of any documents that were modified or incorporated into their submission.
> 

I vote "yes" to all of these proposals. 

Congratulations, DIGgers, on getting a solid foundation in place
(assuming that this proposal passes muster) for the Evergreen
documentation.