Hi folks, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote: > whats the general feeling ? is it worth getting in touch with the > authors and seeing if they would like to maintain them on the wiki > instead ? > > I know some of them are really mad and we wont / dont want to highlight > them too much ( like, gnome-2.16 hacked into a centos-4 machine! ), but > there do seem to be a few good ones there too. I say yes, if the information is deemed useful (and "sane" :-)) enough. Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos at br-online.de> wrote: > What we also could use is a link to the wiki from www.centos.org > (Calling Mr. Nelson! Mr. Nelson!) ... You mean there isn't one? Bu all means, let's put one up ASAP... danieldk at pobox.com wrote: > Attribution-ShareAlike is a pretty fine license, in the same spirit as the > GPL. Though, the GFDL may me a good option too (this is what Wikipedia > uses): > > http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html I say the GFDL is more appropriate, and it's more consistent with the rest of the CentOS project: a GPL operating system ought to have a GFDL Wiki... Best Regards, -- Durval Menezes (durval AT tmp DOT com DOT br, http://www.tmp.com.br/)