[ocaml-infra] ocaml.org licensing
agarwal1975 at gmail.com
Sat Mar 1 23:51:06 GMT 2014
The conversation about whether other OCaml websites are justified is too
hypothetical. Let's consider it when and if someone is actually proposing
to do so.
In the mean time, the licensing issues have been agreed upon, except what I
consider minor details (e.g. where exactly to state the licenses). I'm
assuming at this point that we can go ahead and apply the licenses.
The next issue is whether we need to ask past contributors to agree to the
new licenses. There are three categories of past contributors:
* People who show up in the git log, i.e. people who contributed since the
ocaml.org project started. It should be easy enough to track this group
down, and we should get their permission.
* Contributors to ocaml-tutorials.org, from which the tutorials were taken.
This content was in the public domain, and I was given permission from the
owner of that site to reuse the content. Thus, I think it's okay for us to
place this content under CC-BY-SA without explicit permission from these
contributors. (Note these contributors do not show up in the git log.)
* Content taken from caml.inria.fr. I had verbal approval for this, but we
should get it in writing. It would be great if someone from Inria can help
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Fabrice Le Fessant <
Fabrice.Le_fessant at inria.fr> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Anil Madhavapeddy <avsm2 at cl.cam.ac.uk>
> > So to my question: is there some group that you feel we aren't serving
> > adequately at the moment that would benefit from a refinement of our
> > approach? It's important to know this before we lock in a decision on
> > licensing, as that's a difficult decision to reverse.
> There is no objection here, I was not discussing the licensing issues
> anymore, nor the ambition to create a great website for OCaml.
> I was just replying to some comments worrying about the possibility of
> a fork. Actually, I was not really thinking about a fork, but more
> about websites copying only a few parts of ocaml.org, to provide
> things that would be missing here for these people. Of course, people
> should be encouraged to contribute to ocaml.org, but for me, instead
> of wanting everything to be on ocaml.org, it would be better to
> encourage an ecosystem with a galaxy of websites each one referencing
> each other and cross-linking the content of the other ones.
> Infrastructure mailing list
> Infrastructure at lists.ocaml.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Infrastructure