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 »
Users Search
Help Dashboard Sign In Sign Up
Q&A Blog
Q&A
Posts Tags Edits
Ask Question

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 Please allow specifying license for answers

Post

Please allow specifying license for answers

+3
−0

While one can specify a license when making a question, when writing an answer there doesn't seem to be any place to specify and it just ends up saying "CC BY-SA 4.0" once posted.

While asking a good question can be a lot of work, so can writing a good answer and it'd be nice to be able to specify a license. This may be even more important for technical sites where answers could include code, but I suspect it'd be useful on a lot of sites.

(I'd also like a way to edit a license once something's been posted, but that's probably more complicated, especially if there are multiple editors of the text. It could be a little weird that the original author picking a license ends up selecting the license that any editors of that post are forced to contribute their changes under, though, especially if the editor isn't expecting that.)

feature-request status-completed license
posted over 4 years ago
CC0
4y ago by ArtOfCode‭
user card
Peter Cooper Jr.‭
9 8 116 10
History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (5 comments)
General comments
Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 4 years ago
copy link

Whoops, I thought we had that. Investigating.

Lundin‭ wrote over 4 years ago
copy link

Just as long as picking the license is kept optional, because most non-lawyers don't have a clue or care about the difference between various licenses.

Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 4 years ago
copy link

@Lundin there's a default license on all posts, which is what you get if you do nothing.

Peter Cooper Jr.‭ wrote over 4 years ago
copy link

And I would totally agree that "hiding" it under some "Advanced" link or whatnot could be useful. It may also be nice to link to some help page (either one hosted here or the one at Creative Commons) on what the differences are.

Peter Cooper Jr.‭ wrote over 4 years ago
copy link

We may also want to put some thought in how we show the licensing info for comments. It's a little weird that the license I picked for my post isn't what the comments would be licensed under, and could get real awkward if there's a suggestion posted in a comment, which a post author than adopts, but the license was different from the comment to the post. Yikes letting people specify licenses for content gets complicated quickly, even though it is something I would appreciate being able to do.