On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Daniel Schwen <lists(a)schwen.de> wrote:
than simply
GFDL because as a matter of principle I prefer not to agree
to
new licenses until I've at least had a chance
to review them.
GFDL(-and-later-versions) isn't the only alternative to GFDL-1.2.
What's wrong with CC-BY-SA (any version you like)?
I do use CC licenses (and dual-license at times). Relevant to this
discussion, it is worth noting that "or later versions" is required, rather
than optional, with the current CC-SA licenses. However, clauses that allow
legally binding documents to be unilaterally changed by third parties are
always going to make me uncomfortable no matter how many phrases about
"similar in spirit" one includes in the text, or how respected the license
writers may be.
-Robert Rohde