| Summary: | License council summaries under CC-BY-SA-4.0 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Council | Reporter: | Ulrich Müller <ulm> |
| Component: | unspecified | Assignee: | Ulrich Müller <ulm> |
| Status: | IN_PROGRESS --- | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | calchan |
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/Meeting_logs | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Attachments: |
List of council meeting chairs and authors of summaries
Proposed council/meeting-logs/README file Proposed council/meeting-logs/README file |
||
|
Description
Ulrich Müller
2019-11-17 14:43:38 UTC
Ack. Ack. Ack. Ack. Ack Ack Ack Ack. Ack Can someone please explain to stupid me why a license which explicitly allows one to "remix, transform" this list was chosen? That feels like looking for trouble. And also... what the point of all that is? (In reply to Denis Dupeyron from comment #10) > Can someone please explain to stupid me why a license which explicitly > allows one to "remix, transform" this list was chosen? That feels like > looking for trouble. > > And also... what the point of all that is? Calchan: while I can think of some useful remix/transform projects using the summaries and logs, I'd like a statement from the present council as to what they hope to encourage specifically in their license choice. (In reply to Robin Johnson from comment #11) > (In reply to Denis Dupeyron from comment #10) > > Can someone please explain to stupid me why a license which explicitly > > allows one to "remix, transform" this list was chosen? That feels like > > looking for trouble. > > > > And also... what the point of all that is? > Calchan: while I can think of some useful remix/transform projects using the > summaries and logs, I'd like a statement from the present council as to what > they hope to encourage specifically in their license choice. CC-BY-SA is what GLEP 76 recommends as documentation license: https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0076.html#licensing-of-gentoo-projects It is used for virtually all our documentation, including wiki, devmanual, PMS, and GLEPs. Specifically, allowing remix/transform is useful for projects like dilfridge's council decision overview: https://dev.gentoo.org/~dilfridge/decisions.html (In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #12) > CC-BY-SA is what GLEP 76 recommends as documentation license: > https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0076.html#licensing-of-gentoo-projects > It is used for virtually all our documentation, including wiki, devmanual, > PMS, and GLEPs. > > Specifically, allowing remix/transform is useful for projects like > dilfridge's council decision overview: > https://dev.gentoo.org/~dilfridge/decisions.html Thanks for providing this information. It's certainly useful. However, none of the above covers what we're discussing here, i.e., "List of council meeting chairs and authors of summaries". What I question here is the need for allowing remixing/transforming this information (my opinion is there is no such need [1]), and I can imagine a few harmful consequences of doing so. The same for meeting logs. So, I'd love to see a link to the council meeting or email exchange where a rationale better than "that's what we're doing elsewhere" is discussed. We're not talking about documentation here, which often evolves over time, but about recordkeeping. If no such discussion ever happened I would encourage the council to have it and I would postpone my decision to after it did happen. [1] Unless quoting legally counts as remixing/transforming. Does anybody know? (In reply to Denis Dupeyron from comment #13) > Thanks for providing this information. It's certainly useful. > > However, none of the above covers what we're discussing here, i.e., "List of > council meeting chairs and authors of summaries". This bug is not about the attached list, but about previous meeting summaries. > What I question here is the need for allowing remixing/transforming this > information (my opinion is there is no such need [1]), and I can imagine a > few harmful consequences of doing so. It boils down to the question if the summaries are copyrightable. Since some of them have more than 200 lines of text, they most certainly are, which implies that they need some license in order to be distributed. Then, a free documentation license like CC-BY-SA looks like the natural choice. Not sure what you mean by "harmful consequences"? If you fear that the council's decisions could be misrepresented, then copyright law is the wrong tool to prevent that. > The same for meeting logs. Again, this bug is about the summaries only, not about the IRC logs. It is questionable if the raw logs are even copyrightable. > So, I'd love to see a link to the council meeting or email exchange where a > rationale better than "that's what we're doing elsewhere" is discussed. Well, we had extensive discussions prior to GLEP 76, and what was finally accepted was that all (future) commits to Gentoo repositories must be certified to be under a free license. This includes the council.git repository. Also, "uniformity of licensing" is explicitly mentioned by the GLEP, because it facilitates copying things around (e.g., include extracts from council summaries in other documentation). > We're not talking about documentation here, which often evolves over time, > but about recordkeeping. If no such discussion ever happened I would > encourage the council to have it and I would postpone my decision to after > it did happen. Your choice. Realistically, I don't expect 100% coverage of all previous summaries anyway (although it would be nice). > [1] Unless quoting legally counts as remixing/transforming. Does anybody > know? Note that e.g. in the EU there is no "fair use" provision, so quoting large portions of text may be problematic without a license. Ack. (In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #14) [...] Please calm down. I never wrote anywhere that I wanted this to be copyrightable. I'm only questioning the choice of this particular license and asking for more information and pointers to discussions on these decisions. The bug was filed with absolutely no information on its background. When I'm asked to agree to anything with legal ramifications I like to understand what it is about. Also, if I'm widening the scope it's because I think other documents are in the exact same situation and they probably should be addressed in the same way at the same time. If you're unable to provide the information and explanations I'm asking for, that's OK. Others can hopefully do it. (In reply to Denis Dupeyron from comment #16) > Please calm down. Oops, did my previous comment come across as aggressive? That was certainly not my intention. > I never wrote anywhere that I wanted this to be copyrightable. I'm only > questioning the choice of this particular license and asking for more > information and pointers to discussions on these decisions. The bug was > filed with absolutely no information on its background. There was only a brief discussion in the council, which you can find between 20:11 and 20:21 in the log: https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20191110.txt > When I'm asked to agree to anything with legal ramifications I like to > understand what it is about. > > Also, if I'm widening the scope it's because I think other documents are in > the exact same situation and they probably should be addressed in the same > way at the same time. Right. Without a license, anyone who is reusing parts of such a document will be in muddy waters. Depending on the size of the part used and on local jurisdiction, things may be copyrightable or not, or it may fall under fair use or not. These questions are hard to answer for someone who isn't a legal expert (like most of us). However, all that can be avoided by releasing the document under a free license. Unfortunately, the only way to address it is to ask all authors if they agree to such relicensing, which is somewhat tedious. Nevertheless, we have done this for the GLEP documents in bug 631208, and I'm trying to do it for the council summaries here. Ack ack. Ack Ack Ack Ack. jokey ACK Ack. Ack for ferringb. Acknowledged by Ned Ludd (solar) per e-mail: From: ... <...@gmail.com> To: council@gentoo.org Cc: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:11:02 -0600 Message-ID: <CAEbxmsMOUNy1g-U531wUPOrrPgpUvdJFehi0DevMd+myu=sb-Q@mail.gmail.com> Acknowledged by Markos Chandras (hwoarang) per e-mail: From: Markos Chandras <...@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 08:11:21 +0000 Message-ID: <CAG2jQ8gmMjwo_LaN50ce25c-yeDi71nbF5GFVw1sz3io_hRROA@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Release Gentoo council summaries under CC-BY-SA-4.0 To: council@gentoo.org Acknowledged by Sven Vermeulen (swift) per e-mail: From: Sven Vermeulen <...@...> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 14:18:29 +0100 Message-ID: <CAPzO=NyFuBH27ek035jmES2s_rUU+XTkuYTJBOopm=10Fvin+g@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Release Gentoo council summaries under CC-BY-SA-4.0 To: council@gentoo.org Acknowledged by Danny van Dyk (kugelfang) per e-mail: From: "van Dyk, Danny" <...@tum.de> To: "council@gentoo.org" <council@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: Release Gentoo council summaries under CC-BY-SA-4.0 Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 15:46:13 +0000 Message-ID: <13e761e3ee6c41799c02bb1d8ab74410@tum.de> Ack. Ack for now Ack Acknowledged by Alex Alexander (wired) per e-mail: From: Alex Alexander <...@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 09:23:18 -0800 Message-ID: <CAMUzOaj1SF8UHK4NpadGC00NbQ4EnzgdBbBsFQQW08W_2inyzg@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Release Gentoo council summaries under CC-BY-SA-4.0 To: Gentoo-council-alias <council@gentoo.org> Cc: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> whoops, forgot to answer the first time. ack :) ack Created attachment 613106 [details]
Proposed council/meeting-logs/README file
Created attachment 613112 [details]
Proposed council/meeting-logs/README file
Reassigning to myself, because it is not an actionable item for the council. Status update: We have acknowledgement from authors for all meeting summaries except for the following: date meeting chair author of summary ---------------------------------------------- 2007-10-11 dberkholz 2007-11-08 dberkholz 2007-12-13 dberkholz 2008-02-14 dberkholz 2008-03-13 dberkholz 2008-04-10 dberkholz 2008-05-08 dberkholz 2008-06-12 dberkholz 2008-07-10 dberkholz 2008-08-14 dberkholz 2008-08-28 dberkholz 2008-09-11 dberkholz 2008-09-25 dberkholz 2008-10-23 dberkholz 2008-11-13 tanderson 2008-12-11 tanderson 2009-02-12 tanderson 2009-02-26 tanderson 2009-03-12 tanderson 2009-03-26 tanderson 2009-04-09 tanderson 2009-04-23 tanderson 2009-05-14 tanderson 2009-05-28 tanderson 2009-06-11 tanderson 2009-06-25 tanderson 2009-07-20 solar calchan 2009-08-17 leio tanderson 2009-09-14 dertobi123 tanderson 2010-01-18 calchan calchan 2010-02-08 calchan calchan 2010-03-08 calchan calchan 2010-08-09 scarabeus scarabeus 2011-03-08 scarabeus scarabeus 2011-05-10 scarabeus scarabeus 2011-08-09 dberkholz dberkholz 2012-02-14 dberkholz dberkholz 2014-01-14 dberkholz dberkholz Acknowledged by Thomas Anderson (tanderson) by e-mail: From: "Thomas G. Anderson" <...@...> Date: Wed, 5 May 2021 13:38:15 -0400 Message-ID: <CALiiPCuoXDU8HCQqGcT35gZsvry9SrtfFn_bN7U1GKbK15nyUg@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Resend] Release Gentoo council summaries under CC-BY-SA-4.0 To: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> Hey ulm, Long time, not sure if you even remember me but hope you’re well. Yes I no longer check/use that email. I’m fine with this. Let me know if there’s anything further you need from me. —tanderson Acknowledged by Donnie Berkholz (dberkholz) per e-mail: From: Donnie Berkholz <...@...> Date: Fri, 7 May 2021 16:43:39 -0500 Message-ID: <CALFEeUHs9+pLc3UZsuNzxz0_6xGZTsFGZhOjFXt_B9uEFFo4-A@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Resend] Release Gentoo council summaries under CC-BY-SA-4.0 To: council@gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004e40a205c1c454ed" Acknowledged & agreed Another status update: We have acknowledgement from authors for all meeting summaries except for the following: date meeting chair author of summary ---------------------------------------------- 2009-07-20 solar calchan 2010-01-18 calchan calchan 2010-02-08 calchan calchan 2010-03-08 calchan calchan 2010-08-09 scarabeus scarabeus 2011-03-08 scarabeus scarabeus 2011-05-10 scarabeus scarabeus Acknowledged by Tomáš Chvátal (scarabeus) per e-mail: From: Tomáš Chvátal <...@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 8 May 2021 09:01:14 +0100 Message-ID: <CA+NrkpciWT3anF+644StU-TMRFFhiVG0PZZ90QS8dEY_2hmRNA@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Ulrich Mueller] Release Gentoo council summaries under CC-BY-SA-4.0 To: Gentoo Council <council@gentoo.org>, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> [...] Feel free to use the cc-by-sa-4.0 on any minutes/summaries I’ve created myself :) Status update: We have acknowledgement from authors for all meeting summaries except for the following four meetings in 2009 and 2010: date meeting chair author of summary ---------------------------------------------- 2009-07-20 solar calchan 2010-01-18 calchan calchan 2010-02-08 calchan calchan 2010-03-08 calchan calchan |
