#445 Code of Conduct: CC BY 4.0 license for the supplementary documentation
Closed: approved 2 months ago by bcotton. Opened 2 months ago by jflory7.

Previously, @riecatnor asked whether the Fedora Code of Conduct can use a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, instead of our default CC BY-SA 4.0 license. I assumed this implicitly meant the Code of Conduct and its supplemental documentation, but this was not clear.

I am of the mindset that all of our CoC-related documentation should share the same license, because in practice, I see others who might reuse and remix our CoC into something else grouping these two things together. Two different licenses for the CoC and the CoC supplemental documentation is confusing. I am also personally okay with a third-party mixing our CoC supplemental documentation with content that might not be Creative Commons-licensed, which would be an issue in a CC BY-SA 4.0 context.

So, this ticket is to formalize a Council vote that our CoC supplementary documentation should also have the CC BY 4.0 license like our Code of Conduct itself (which was already approved and done).

I've created a topic on Fedora Discussion for this ticket.

Please keep this ticket focused. Discuss there, and record votes and decisions here. Thanks!


I don't think this is necessary since 1) the supplementary documentation should become more Fedora-specific over time as it addresses our particular usage of the CoC and 2) the CC BY-SA license on the supplemental docs doesn't hinder anyone wanting to adopt/adapt our CoC. They can either accept the BY-SAness of the supplemental docs or write their own specific to their community.

I was only grudgingly in favor of making the CoC itself CC BY because I understand the reality that a project's license permissivity generally correlates to the breadth of adoption. In my dream world, projects that adopt our CoC wouldn't be able to restrict further downstream use, but I'm willing to accept that in order to get broader adoption of similar CoCs across the ecosystem.

+1, but I also see Ben's point.

+1, and I also see Ben's point.


Agreed with what @bcotton mentioned

Never recorded it here, but this was implemented.

Metadata Update from @bcotton:
- Issue close_status updated to: approved
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

2 months ago

Login to comment on this ticket.