This thread is about the portuguese translation of the Panda3d-Manual, I started writing a wikibook by myself wishing I could learn how to use the engine. Now the brazilian community have some users and they are helping to translate the manual.
pt.wikibooks.org/wiki/Panda3D
We are working in some tutorials, trying to get used to Panda3d and helping each other. Now we have a forum dedicated to Panda3d, we wish we can help other users with all that work.
The wikibook admin wants to know the manual license, so I have to ask you if we can still translate the manual with your permission.
Thanks for your efforts. Its an interesting question. I (for myself) would say: Its more or less CC, but thats something that indeed needs a clarification. Its free stuff edited by free people.
To the devs/CMU: What do you say? Put it under CC license? (GPL is a bit unappropriate and the BSD license would enable people to use the manual knowledge without honouring the work done here.)
I think it belongs under the Panda license, i.e. the BSD license. It makes sense to put the manual under the same license as the code it documents. In fact, I think that was the original intention, even if it has never been formally stated on the website.
We don’t mind if Panda is used uncredited, so why should we object if the same is done with its manual?
Why should we handle it other than the P3D engine? Well, basically that depends on the contributors. As long as its not stated that the work they do is under the BSD lincense, every user has its own copyright on his text. So maybe we can “convert” it to BSD license then officially by putting a noticeable comment to the manual?
Plus giving the recent writers a bit time to react to it if they want it to be BSD? As said, I (personally) would prefer the CC because you can simply check them to ask before they use it in a commercial way. It would be cool to know that the knowledge has been used there. - But yea, all I did were some minor changes. So I don’t play a big role in the manual section. ^^