CentOS 6 (and 5.6) doc on http://www.centos.org/docs
On 07/08/2011 10:14 PM, Ed Heron wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 19:01 +0200, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> As a relatively independent project, it is not fair to expect the
> upstream provider to bear the network load of serving their documents to
> CentOS users.
Hmm, that was not my plain either : having a local copy served from
centos.org machine but with a header/footer on the /docs apache dir to
mention that those are Red Hat documentation and have a link to the
> It is my impression that we could and should 'adapt' the documentation
> by removing the upstream provider logos and other marks (as applicable)
> and mark the documentation as CentOS documentation. Obviously,
> including references to the original document. This would give the
> CentOS project the ability to edit out the aspects that are specific to
> the upstream product, such as the contract number during install.
ok, submit a patch / script to do that :-)
> The most obvious downside is that any documentation updates released
> by the upstream provider would have to be merged into the CentOS
> The most obvious upside is that we could modify [our version of] the
> documentation directly without submitting (though possibly also
> submitting) bug reports against the original docs. We would want to
> release our modifications with the same CC-by-SA license so others could
> use them as appropriate.
> I remember a short discussion, on this list, mentioning the change of
> license a while back.
CentOS-docs mailing list