3 ms·

"You are free to distribute this book to anyone you want, so long as... it is not altered..." That doesn't seem consistent w/ the intended usage patterns of gi

"You are free to distribute this book to anyone you want, so long as... it is not altered..." That doesn't seem consistent w/ the intended usage patterns of git and github, e.g. github's 'Fork' button is displayed prominently on every src page, for the purpose of alteration and distribution of src.

bryanbibat 15y ago
Noted. Any suggestions on a good license to use for this document to allow non-commercial derivative works?
- noahc 15y ago
  You're looking for this: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ Although, there is one that prevents modification as well if that's what you're looking for.
  - bryanbibat 15y ago
    Thanks! Will update the document tomorrow to use that in case no one makes a better suggestion.
    - albb0920 15y ago
      Thanks for using cc-by-nc.
  - zedshaw 15y ago
    No, that license allows remixing and adapting the work. That would let people butcher the book and leave broken copies that frustrate students.
    - noahc 15y ago
      Zed, that's what he wanted. As I suggested there are alternatives to prevent someone from changing even one word.
      - bryanbibat 15y ago
        Yup. While it is true that allowing others to modify my work will probably bite me in the ass in the future, there are also some arguments for allowing this. For one, the book is targeted to Filipino students - teachers may want to modify the names/scenarios to better suit their country. Sure, gives them a low-hanging trolling fruit (e.g. putting vulgar words in the i18n section), but I really don't have the time to review these forks.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- bryanbibat 15y ago
  While I agree to some of your points (i.e. I'll go WTF?!? if someone would sell my crappy book), there's no need to go off the hook ;D
  - noahc 15y ago
    You might want to read: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/02/please_dont_buy.html http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/02/please_dont_... I'm sure there is a cottage industry of people who take creative commons works licensed without the non-commercial attribute and sell them. They aren't making a ton, but they do sell a few and it costs basically nothing to put it up on Amazon.
- timsally 15y ago
  You're reading way too much into molecule's comment. He's merely commenting on the fact that the chosen hosting platform is explicitly designed for purposes that are counter to the chosen license. I see no judgements on the choice of the license itself. Can you explain how the comment implies that "everything needs to be on [programmers'] terms"?
  - noahc 15y ago
    To be fair, I assumed the same thing that the parent did. The reaction came from "The guy just said he doesn't want to allow forks or changes" so what does it matter if github has a feature that allows it. The button isn't a licensing agreement like CC, GPL, etc are.
dan_manges 15y ago
git is a great vcs, and github a great hosting platform, even if you don't intend to use features like forking and pull requests
zedshaw 15y ago
tl;dr If you fork and don't pull-request then that's the violation. That's the point. If you fork and don't do a pull request so I can pull it back, then you're leaving an altered copy out there. Can't do that. If however you do a pull request and I pull your changes in, then your fork is no longer an alteration. This prevents people from butchering your work because they think they know better and then leaving half-assed junk out there to screw students over, but still lets people contribute fixes.

bryanbibat 15y ago

Noted. Any suggestions on a good license to use for this document to allow non-commercial derivative works?

noahc 15y ago
You're looking for this: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ Although, there is one that prevents modification as well if that's what you're looking for.
- bryanbibat 15y ago
  Thanks! Will update the document tomorrow to use that in case no one makes a better suggestion.
  - albb0920 15y ago
    Thanks for using cc-by-nc.
- zedshaw 15y ago
  No, that license allows remixing and adapting the work. That would let people butcher the book and leave broken copies that frustrate students.
  - noahc 15y ago
    Zed, that's what he wanted. As I suggested there are alternatives to prevent someone from changing even one word.
    - bryanbibat 15y ago
      Yup. While it is true that allowing others to modify my work will probably bite me in the ass in the future, there are also some arguments for allowing this. For one, the book is targeted to Filipino students - teachers may want to modify the names/scenarios to better suit their country. Sure, gives them a low-hanging trolling fruit (e.g. putting vulgar words in the i18n section), but I really don't have the time to review these forks.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

bryanbibat 15y ago
While I agree to some of your points (i.e. I'll go WTF?!? if someone would sell my crappy book), there's no need to go off the hook ;D
- noahc 15y ago
  You might want to read: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/02/please_dont_buy.html http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/02/please_dont_... I'm sure there is a cottage industry of people who take creative commons works licensed without the non-commercial attribute and sell them. They aren't making a ton, but they do sell a few and it costs basically nothing to put it up on Amazon.
timsally 15y ago
You're reading way too much into molecule's comment. He's merely commenting on the fact that the chosen hosting platform is explicitly designed for purposes that are counter to the chosen license. I see no judgements on the choice of the license itself. Can you explain how the comment implies that "everything needs to be on [programmers'] terms"?
- noahc 15y ago
  To be fair, I assumed the same thing that the parent did. The reaction came from "The guy just said he doesn't want to allow forks or changes" so what does it matter if github has a feature that allows it. The button isn't a licensing agreement like CC, GPL, etc are.

dan_manges 15y ago

git is a great vcs, and github a great hosting platform, even if you don't intend to use features like forking and pull requests

zedshaw 15y ago

tl;dr If you fork and don't pull-request then that's the violation. That's the point. If you fork and don't do a pull request so I can pull it back, then you're leaving an altered copy out there. Can't do that. If however you do a pull request and I pull your changes in, then your fork is no longer an alteration. This prevents people from butchering your work because they think they know better and then leaving half-assed junk out there to screw students over, but still lets people contribute fixes.