Merge pull request #429 from github/home-reform

Add existing project situation, leave 1 permissive, 1 copyleft choice

Author: mlinksva

assets/css/application.scss

@@ -125,6 +125,10 @@ strong {
   width: 220px;
 }
 
+.situations .existing {
+  margin-top: 16px;
+}
+
 .situations .whatever {
   margin-top: 16px;
 }
@@ -143,9 +147,9 @@ strong {
   display: inline-block;
 }
 
-.three-arrows { background-position: 0 0;      width: 72px; height: 57px; }
-.lightbulb    { background-position: 0 -57px;  width: 43px; height: 72px; }
-.circular     { background-position: 0 -129px; width: 72px; height: 69px; }
+.three-arrows { background-position: 0 0;      width: 72px; height: 56px; }
+.community    { background-position: 0 -57px;  width: 72px; height: 56px; }
+.circular     { background-position: 0 -115px; width: 72px; height: 68px; }
 
 
 .license-overview {
@@ -438,12 +442,12 @@ strong {
  only screen and (-o-min-device-pixel-ratio: 200/100),
  only screen and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 2.0) {
   .three-arrows,
-  .lightbulb,
+  .community,
   .circular {
     background-image: url(../img/home-sprite@2x.png);
-    -webkit-background-size: 72px 198px;
-    -moz-background-size: 72px 198px;
-    background-size: 72px 198px;
+    -webkit-background-size: 72px 182px;
+    -moz-background-size: 72px 182px;
+    background-size: 72px 182px;
   }
 
   .license-sprite {

assets/img/home-sprite.png

@@ -1,19 +1,23 @@
 ---
 layout: default
-permalink: /existing/
+permalink: /community/
+redirect_from: /existing/
 title: Existing projects and communities
 ---
 
 If you're contributing to or extending an existing project, it's almost always easiest to continue using that project's license. Look for a file called `LICENSE` or `COPYING`, or a notice in the project's `README` to find out what that license is. If you can't find a license, [ask](/no-permission/#for-users).
 
 Depending on how you're building on an existing project and what its license is, using the existing project's license for your own might not just be the easiest thing to do, but a condition on which your permission to build on the existing project rests: see the "same license" condition of [some licenses](/licenses/).
 
-Some communities have strong preferences for particular licenses. If you want to participate in one of these, it will be easier to use the preferred license even if you're starting a brand new project with no existing dependencies. A few examples:
+Some communities have strong preferences for particular licenses. If you want to participate in one of these, it will be easier to use the preferred license even if you're starting a brand new project with no existing dependencies. Examples:
 
 {: .bullets}
 
 * [Apache](https://www.apache.org/licenses/) requires [Apache License 2.0](/licenses/apache-2.0/)
+* [Cloud Native Computing Foundation](https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/project_proposals.adoc) dictates [Apache License 2.0](/licenses/apache-2.0/) by default
 * [GNU](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations.html) recommends [GNU GPLv3](/licenses/gpl-3.0/) for most programs
-* [OpenBSD](https://www.openbsd.org/policy.html) prefers [ISC](/licenses/isc/)
+* [NPM packages](https://libraries.io/search?platforms=NPM) overwhelmingly use the [MIT](/licenses/mit/) or the very similar [ISC](/licenses/isc) licenses
+* [OpenBSD](https://www.openbsd.org/policy.html) prefers the [ISC License](/licenses/isc/)
+* [WordPress](https://wordpress.org/about/license/) plugins and themes must be [GNU GPLv2](/licenses/gpl-2.0/) (or later)
 
-Communities come in all shapes and sizes. The examples above are *very* well established. If the community you see your project as a part of doesn't have set-in-stone licensing traditions, or you don't see your project as part of any particular community, that's just fine: [make your own choice of an open source license](/).
+Communities come in all shapes and sizes, and more than one might be pertinent (e.g., [your company](https://opensource.guide/legal/#what-does-my-companys-legal-team-need-to-know)). The examples above are *very* well established. If the community you see your project as a part of doesn't have set-in-stone licensing traditions, or you don't see your project as part of any particular community, that's just fine: [make your own choice of an open source license](/).

assets/img/home-sprite@2x.png

@@ -6,34 +6,36 @@
 permalink: /
 ---
 
+<p>An open source license protects contributors and users. Businesses and savvy developers won’t touch a project without this protection.</p>
+
 <h2>
   <span>{</span>
   Which of the following best describes your situation?
   <span>}</span>
 </h2>
 <ul class="triptych situations clearfix">
-  <li class="whatever">
-    <a href="licenses/mit">
-      <span class="triptych-sprite three-arrows"></span>
-      <h3>I want it simple and permissive.</h3>
+  <li class="existing">
+    <a href="existing">
+      <span class="triptych-sprite community"></span>
+      <h3>I need to work in a community.</h3>
     </a>
     <p>
-      The <a href="licenses/mit">MIT License</a> is a permissive license that is short and to the point. It lets people do anything they want with your code as long as they provide attribution back to you and don’t hold you liable.
+      Use the <a href="community/">license preferred by the community</a> you’re contributing to or depending on. Your project will fit right in.
     </p>
     <p>
-      {% include using-sentence.html license-id="mit" %}
+      If you have a dependency that doesn't have a license, ask its maintainers to <a href="no-permission/#for-users">add a license</a>.
     </p>
   </li>
-  <li class="patents">
-    <a href="licenses/apache-2.0/">
-      <span class="triptych-sprite lightbulb"></span>
-      <h3>I’m concerned about patents.</h3>
+  <li class="whatever">
+    <a href="licenses/mit">
+      <span class="triptych-sprite three-arrows"></span>
+      <h3>I want it simple and permissive.</h3>
     </a>
     <p>
-      The <a href="licenses/apache-2.0/">Apache License 2.0</a> is a permissive license similar to the MIT License, but also provides an express grant of patent rights from contributors to users.
+      The <a href="licenses/mit">MIT License</a> is short and to the point. It lets people do almost anything they want with your project, including to make and distribute closed source versions.
     </p>
     <p>
-      {% include using-sentence.html license-id="apache-2.0" %}
+      {% include using-sentence.html license-id="mit" %}
     </p>
   </li>
   <li class="copyleft">
@@ -42,7 +44,7 @@ <h3>I’m concerned about patents.</h3>
       <h3>I care about sharing improvements.</h3>
     </a>
     <p>
-      The <a href="licenses/gpl-3.0/">GNU GPLv3</a> is a copyleft license that requires anyone who distributes your code or a derivative work to make the source available under the same terms, and also provides an express grant of patent rights from contributors to users.
+      The <a href="licenses/gpl-3.0/">GNU GPLv3</a> also lets people do almost anything they want with your project, <em>except</em> to distribute closed source versions.
     </p>
     <p>
       {% include using-sentence.html license-id="gpl-3.0" %}