Talk:Licensing - Revision history

MartinDengler: add "me too"

2011-06-26T00:48:48Z

add "me too"

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:48, 25 June 2011
Line 34:		Line 34:

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

			+1 FWIW [[User:MartinDengler\|MartinDengler]] 20:48, 25 June 2011 (EDT)

Walter at 15:19, 24 June 2011

2011-06-24T15:19:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:19, 24 June 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''DRAFT of new Licensing text as per the discussion at the 9 June 2011 SLOBs meeting'''		'''DRAFT of new Licensing text as per the discussion at the 9 June 2011 SLOBs meeting'''

	Sugar Labs adheres to the principles of Free Software. An [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html overview of these principles] is ~~found on~~ the ~~[http://gnu.org~~ FSF~~.org website]~~. The ~~OSD~~ has a [http://opensource.org/docs/osd set of guidelines for Free and Open Source software] that characterize the intentions of our community.		Sugar Labs adheres to the principles of Free Software. An [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html overview of these principles] is provided by the Free Software Foundation (FSF). The Open Source Initiative (OSI) has a [http://opensource.org/docs/osd set of guidelines for Free and Open Source software] that characterize the intentions of our community.

	All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.		All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.
Line 30:		Line 30:
	:Nitpicking is right... but I made the change :) --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:51, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:Nitpicking is right... but I made the change :) --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:51, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	:: That's better, though I'd remove that link altogether. It adds nothing to the official Sugar Labs Licensing page. My suggestion was "is provided by the FSF", with no embedded link at all. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 11:11, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:: That's better, though I'd remove that link altogether. It adds nothing to the official Sugar Labs Licensing page. My suggestion was "is provided by the FSF", with no embedded link at all. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 11:11, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			:::Sure... less is more. But I decided to spell out our acronyms when first used (and OSD->OSI) :P --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 11:19, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	----		----

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

Bert: nag

2011-06-24T15:11:14Z

nag

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:11, 24 June 2011
Line 29:		Line 29:
	''Another nit pick: I find the second link to the GNU.org website distracting and unnecessary. I'd replace ''"is found on the [http://gnu.org GNU.org website]"'' with ''"is provided by the FSF"''. The FSF is mentioned again later, so it's better to use the same name. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 10:04, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		''Another nit pick: I find the second link to the GNU.org website distracting and unnecessary. I'd replace ''"is found on the [http://gnu.org GNU.org website]"'' with ''"is provided by the FSF"''. The FSF is mentioned again later, so it's better to use the same name. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 10:04, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	:Nitpicking is right... but I made the change :) --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:51, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:Nitpicking is right... but I made the change :) --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:51, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			:: That's better, though I'd remove that link altogether. It adds nothing to the official Sugar Labs Licensing page. My suggestion was "is provided by the FSF", with no embedded link at all. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 11:11, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	----		----

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

Walter at 14:51, 24 June 2011

2011-06-24T14:51:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:51, 24 June 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''DRAFT of new Licensing text as per the discussion at the 9 June 2011 SLOBs meeting'''		'''DRAFT of new Licensing text as per the discussion at the 9 June 2011 SLOBs meeting'''

	Sugar Labs adheres to the principles of Free Software. An [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html overview of these principles] is found on the [http://gnu.org ~~GNU~~.org website]. The OSD has a [http://opensource.org/docs/osd set of guidelines for Free and Open Source software] that characterize the intentions of our community.		Sugar Labs adheres to the principles of Free Software. An [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html overview of these principles] is found on the [http://gnu.org FSF.org website]. The OSD has a [http://opensource.org/docs/osd set of guidelines for Free and Open Source software] that characterize the intentions of our community.

	All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.		All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.
Line 28:		Line 28:
	::: Yes. I agree... consistency. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:02, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		::: Yes. I agree... consistency. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:02, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	''Another nit pick: I find the second link to the GNU.org website distracting and unnecessary. I'd replace ''"is found on the [http://gnu.org GNU.org website]"'' with ''"is provided by the FSF"''. The FSF is mentioned again later, so it's better to use the same name. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 10:04, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		''Another nit pick: I find the second link to the GNU.org website distracting and unnecessary. I'd replace ''"is found on the [http://gnu.org GNU.org website]"'' with ''"is provided by the FSF"''. The FSF is mentioned again later, so it's better to use the same name. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 10:04, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			:Nitpicking is right... but I made the change :) --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:51, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	----		----

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

Bert: suggest rephrasing FSF link

2011-06-24T14:04:23Z

suggest rephrasing FSF link

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:04, 24 June 2011
Line 27:		Line 27:
	:: Maybe just to be explicit, write "Good Licenses" instead of "acceptable licenses"? [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 09:54, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:: Maybe just to be explicit, write "Good Licenses" instead of "acceptable licenses"? [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 09:54, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	::: Yes. I agree... consistency. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:02, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		::: Yes. I agree... consistency. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:02, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			''Another nit pick: I find the second link to the GNU.org website distracting and unnecessary. I'd replace ''"is found on the [http://gnu.org GNU.org website]"'' with ''"is provided by the FSF"''. The FSF is mentioned again later, so it's better to use the same name. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 10:04, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	----		----

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

Walter: acceptable --> good

2011-06-24T14:02:05Z

acceptable --> good

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:02, 24 June 2011
Line 5:		Line 5:
	All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.		All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.

	You may use any license on the Fedora Project's [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses list of ~~acceptable licenses~~] or the FSF's [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html list of Free Software ~~licenses~~]. If you wish to use a license not on one of these two lists and believe that it fits our guidelines, please contact the [[Oversight Board]].		You may use any license on the Fedora Project's [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses list of Good Licenses] or the FSF's [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html list of Free Software Licenses]. If you wish to use a license not on one of these two lists and believe that it fits our guidelines, please contact the [[Oversight Board]].

	----		----
Line 26:		Line 26:
	:The problem with the Fedora link was a typo. Should link directly to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses now. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:23, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:The problem with the Fedora link was a typo. Should link directly to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses now. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:23, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	:: Maybe just to be explicit, write "Good Licenses" instead of "acceptable licenses"? [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 09:54, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:: Maybe just to be explicit, write "Good Licenses" instead of "acceptable licenses"? [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 09:54, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	----		::: Yes. I agree... consistency. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:02, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			----

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

Bert: suggest link title "Good Licenses"

2011-06-24T13:54:24Z

suggest link title "Good Licenses"

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:54, 24 June 2011
Line 25:		Line 25:
	:Sorry. I realize I had the wrong link. Should be http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which includes many non-GNU licenses. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:Sorry. I realize I had the wrong link. Should be http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which includes many non-GNU licenses. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	:The problem with the Fedora link was a typo. Should link directly to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses now. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:23, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:The problem with the Fedora link was a typo. Should link directly to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses now. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:23, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			:: Maybe just to be explicit, write "Good Licenses" instead of "acceptable licenses"? [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 09:54, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	----		----

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

Alsroot at 13:32, 24 June 2011

2011-06-24T13:32:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:32, 24 June 2011
Line 25:		Line 25:
	:Sorry. I realize I had the wrong link. Should be http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which includes many non-GNU licenses. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:Sorry. I realize I had the wrong link. Should be http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which includes many non-GNU licenses. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	:The problem with the Fedora link was a typo. Should link directly to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses now. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:23, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:The problem with the Fedora link was a typo. Should link directly to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses now. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:23, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

			----

			+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

Walter: incorporating Bert's suggestion re GNU language

2011-06-24T13:26:04Z

incorporating Bert's suggestion re GNU language

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:26, 24 June 2011
Line 5:		Line 5:
	All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.		All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.

	You may use any license on the Fedora Project's [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses list of acceptable licenses] or the FSF's [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html list of licenses]. If you wish to use a license not on one of these two lists and believe that it fits our guidelines, please contact the [[Oversight Board]].		You may use any license on the Fedora Project's [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses list of acceptable licenses] or the FSF's [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html list of Free Software licenses]. If you wish to use a license not on one of these two lists and believe that it fits our guidelines, please contact the [[Oversight Board]].

	----		----

Walter: fixed typo in Fedora link

2011-06-24T13:23:21Z

fixed typo in Fedora link

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:23, 24 June 2011
Line 5:		Line 5:
	All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.		All software and content distributed by Sugar Labs, including activity bundles uploaded to http://activities.sugarlabs.org, must be released under a license that conforms to the principles and guidelines referred to above.

	You may use any license on the Fedora Project's [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses's list of acceptable licenses] or the FSF's [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html list of licenses]. If you wish to use a license not on one of these two lists and believe that it fits our guidelines, please contact the [[Oversight Board]].		You may use any license on the Fedora Project's [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses list of acceptable licenses] or the FSF's [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html list of licenses]. If you wish to use a license not on one of these two lists and believe that it fits our guidelines, please contact the [[Oversight Board]].

	----		----
Line 24:		Line 24:

	:Sorry. I realize I had the wrong link. Should be http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which includes many non-GNU licenses. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:Sorry. I realize I had the wrong link. Should be http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which includes many non-GNU licenses. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			:The problem with the Fedora link was a typo. Should link directly to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses now. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:23, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:11, 24 June 2011
Line 29:		Line 29:
	''Another nit pick: I find the second link to the GNU.org website distracting and unnecessary. I'd replace ''"is found on the [http://gnu.org GNU.org website]"'' with ''"is provided by the FSF"''. The FSF is mentioned again later, so it's better to use the same name. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 10:04, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		''Another nit pick: I find the second link to the GNU.org website distracting and unnecessary. I'd replace ''"is found on the [http://gnu.org GNU.org website]"'' with ''"is provided by the FSF"''. The FSF is mentioned again later, so it's better to use the same name. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 10:04, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	:Nitpicking is right... but I made the change :) --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:51, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:Nitpicking is right... but I made the change :) --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:51, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			:: That's better, though I'd remove that link altogether. It adds nothing to the official Sugar Labs Licensing page. My suggestion was "is provided by the FSF", with no embedded link at all. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 11:11, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	----		----

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:04, 24 June 2011
Line 27:		Line 27:
	:: Maybe just to be explicit, write "Good Licenses" instead of "acceptable licenses"? [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 09:54, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:: Maybe just to be explicit, write "Good Licenses" instead of "acceptable licenses"? [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 09:54, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	::: Yes. I agree... consistency. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:02, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		::: Yes. I agree... consistency. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 10:02, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			''Another nit pick: I find the second link to the GNU.org website distracting and unnecessary. I'd replace ''"is found on the [http://gnu.org GNU.org website]"'' with ''"is provided by the FSF"''. The FSF is mentioned again later, so it's better to use the same name. [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 10:04, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	----		----

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:54, 24 June 2011
Line 25:		Line 25:
	:Sorry. I realize I had the wrong link. Should be http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which includes many non-GNU licenses. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:Sorry. I realize I had the wrong link. Should be http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which includes many non-GNU licenses. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	:The problem with the Fedora link was a typo. Should link directly to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses now. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:23, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		:The problem with the Fedora link was a typo. Should link directly to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses now. --[[User:Walter\|Walter]] 09:23, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
			:: Maybe just to be explicit, write "Good Licenses" instead of "acceptable licenses"? [[User:Bert\|Bert]] 09:54, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
	----		----

	+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)		+1, having Fedora list of good licences will simplify workflow on ASLO to make it automatic, ie, activities-testing.sugarlabs.org [[Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/Licensing\|sees]] to the {{Code\|licence}} tag in the {{Code\|activitiy.info}} to accept/reject any new upload. [[User:Alsroot\|alsroot]] 09:32, 24 June 2011 (EDT)