Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on Allow licence change when there's only one contributor

Parent

Allow licence change when there's only one contributor

+8
−0

I wrote a post without realizing I was using the default licence CC BY-SA instead of the licence I wanted to use (CC0).

I wanted to amend my mistake; I wasn't able to.

Other similar (but closed source) Q&A platforms allow for flash edit. I need licence flash edits!

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (1 comment)
Post
+4
−0

I agree that authors should be able to make an immediate edit to change the license -- you post, only then notice the default license, and can't fix it. That's frustrating. The workaround of deleting and reposting is extra hassle -- and, for answers and for people who can see deleted posts, adds clutter. It would be better for authors to be able to fix that. What's a reasonable grace period for this sort of edit?

That's about immediate edits. The broader use case (implied by your title) is interesting too and requires more thought. If you're the only person who has edited the post so far, it does seem reasonable that you should be able to change the license -- nobody else is invested in it yet. The implementation could also get complex. Some questions:

  • What should we do about tag-only edits? Tags are metadata not content, so maybe they shouldn't count against the author's ability to change the license.

  • But if we say that, then are we opening the door for trivial edits -- for an author saying "look, somebody corrected my one-character typo; why should that block me?"? Which might then lead to a need for editor approvals of license changes, and suddenly this is getting too complicated for its benefit.

  • Does the license status of a question affect answers and answerers? If the license for a question is changed, is there a reason for people who answered to object? (Real question, not rhetorical -- I have no idea.)

If we only supported immediate license edits ("immediate" to be defined), would that address enough of the need to be worthwhile? Or would that not be helpful without the broader approach?

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (2 comments)
General comments
Canina‭ wrote over 3 years ago

Regarding the last bullet point, consider also where someone answers a question and, in doing so, quotes part of the question. If the person who posted the question then changes to a more restrictive license, does that affect the use of that material in the answer?

Canina‭ wrote over 3 years ago

Also, what if that is done somewhere other than in an answer directly to the question, say, in a blog post elsewhere? Such use might be in compliance with, say, CC BY-SA, but not CC BY-NC-SA. Lots of complexities that might need consideration.