Activity Library/Editors/Policy/Non-Technical: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 10:33, 11 December 2009

Some points that could be considered during activity review(maybe some of activities should be removed at all).

inappropriate(violent, sexual, subversive content) content
inappropriate licence
- code should be covered by one of FSF GPL compatible list
- the rest of content should one of CC licences
(?) activity is just bundled application which already (well)packaged in various distros
...

(?) lack of educational value
arguable, it could be something useful for user environment e.g. UsbCreator
A: add such value :)
any confusion with already existed activities
A: make difference more clear, obvious renaming, making notice in description etc.
...

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 * inappropriate(violent, sexual, subversive content) content
-* non-FOSS licence, any restriction for essential(for education, some people think, essential for
+* inappropriate licence
-other cases too:) behaviour, free to run|study|redistribute|change
+** code should be covered by one of [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses FSF GPL compatible list]
-** code should conform [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses FSF GPL compatible list]
 ** the rest of content should one of [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ CC] licences
 * (?) activity is just bundled application which already (well)packaged in various distros