I think "Attribution-Share Alike" is the best fit for "non-code" sources such as presentations, images, and/or documents.
EPL for sample code, examples and snippets.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 3:17 AM, David M Williams
<david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Naci,
You mentioned this license in status
meeting for some educational materials, and I've been learning more about
it, as I promised :)
But, seems to me, there's actual a number
of different variations ... more or less "free", and more or
less restrictive, etc.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_License
I've just skimmed the wiki article so
far, but was wondering if you could narrow it down some ... did you have
one of the specific variants in mind?
Or would that just be left open to each author?
Thanks,
_______________________________________________
wtp-pmc mailing list
wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-pmc
--
Naci Dai -
naci.dai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxeteration a.s. itu ari-1 25 maslak istanbul tr
ph: +90 212 328 0825 - fax: +90 212 328 0521
