[CentOS-docs] http://www.centos.org/docs

Fri Apr 20 17:44:03 UTC 2012
Crunch <numbercruncher245 at gmail.com>

On 04/06/2012 08:08 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:

Hi All

Some comments on the foot note for the documentation at 
http://www.centos.org/docs. The comments are with regard to the open 
commons license that comes with the original documentation.
*Note:* This documentation is provided {and copyrighted} by *Red Hat®, 
Inc.* and is released via the Open Publication License. The copyright 
holder has added the further requirement that /Distribution of 
substantively modified versions of this document is prohibited without 
the explicit permission of the copyright holder/. The *CentOS project* 
redistributes these original works (in their unmodified form) as a 
reference for *CentOS-5* because *CentOS-5* is built from publicly 
available, open source SRPMS. The documentation is unmodified to be 
compliant with upstream distribution policy. Neither *CentOS-5* nor the 
*CentOS Project* are in any way affiliated with or sponsored by *Red 
Hat®, Inc.*

1) Why if the original document was licensed with an "open commons" 
license is the document being relicensed as an "open publication" license.
2) Why does the foot note say that you can't modify the document? "open 
commons" states that you can do anything you like to the document so 
long as it retains a reference to the original document and licensor.

Assuming that one could actually distribute the documentation as I 
described in points (2) above:

1) Would it be right to relabel their documentation as CentOS after they 
worked so hard on it.
2) The howto documentation style seems to  be more practical or have 
more utility. Although, more may be better when it comes to information.

After thinking about this, CentOS(your) project goals and KB's comments, 
maybe keeping the current style of http://www.centos.org/docs is not 
such a bad idea. Although I'm not to sure the foot note is in line with 
the original license.


Paul R.