Dag Wieers wrote: > On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Ralph Angenendt wrote: [...] >> If you put a *HEADER* on your page which states that *this* one document >> is licensed under the GDFL and *NOT* under a CC license, I am *not* >> happy with that, but I think it could work. >> >> Anyone having a problem with that? > > Yes, I prefer not to have content with different licenses because it may > become a management nightmare at some point. Especially if content is > being merged at some point or being rewritten. > > There is an advantage in keeping things simple. > > Why is the CC license not sufficient ? Why does the author not want to > dual-license or relicense his content ? Because I prefer GFDL. I prefer and I want give all the rights over the document, instead start providing some rights. I feel more confortable and overall free with GFDL. Anyway, I'm not sure to publish more documents in the CentOS wiki, this is not being a good experience for me. Is difficult to publish documentation here. And after have explained what and where I want to contribute, I was almost forced to re-licence or change the licence of my documentation (and you didn't think that someone could want to keep his freedom and publish his documentation with the original licence that he choose?). Bye. -- Morenisco. Centro de Difusión del Software Libre. http://www.cdsl.cl http://santiago.flisol.cl Blog: http://morenisco.belvil.eu