On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 02:57:07PM +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
On 09/20/2012 02:27 PM, Garrett LeSage wrote:
>On 09/20/2012 08:17 AM, Daniel Veillard wrote:
>> The top page and the Download page don't even tell what licence
>>is applicable, IMHO that crucial information should be presented to
>>the user between the time it hits the home page and the time he's told
>>how to install it on Fedora 17.
>That's a great point.
>Is it enough to mention "ASL2.0" in the footer and link to a licensing
>page, like the current oVirt.org
website does? Or should we say more?
IMHO, the license matters at earliest when you're downloading (so
not on the front page), and probably only when you're making changes
(the "Developer" or "Contributor" pages). The important thing is to
I think you're optimistic there. Lot of people won't download stuff
if they can't tell the Licence upfront, not just me :-)
Daniel Veillard | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
daniel(a)veillard.com | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
| virtualization library http://libvirt.org/