No license

[GoogleCodeExporter]

There is no license listed for this project. It's indicated in the Google 
project metadata that it's open source, but other than that, there's no 
information on it. As such, I can't legally base my mods on springtutorialgame, 
and I'm actually in murky territory just reading the source code -- my game 
could be considered a derivative work, which means I can't distribute it 
without your approval or a license implicitly granting approval.

Please assign a license to the project. If you want a maximally free license, 
the WTFPL is equivalent to public domain.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by dhasenan@gmail.com on 18 Nov 2014 at 4:41

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I did not see this, sorry.
WTFPL, public domain, or whatever is most free.
Is it good enough like this or do you "need" ;) it more official somewhere?

Original comment by anmeldek...@web.de on 18 Feb 2015 at 11:45

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Typically, projects will include a file in their root directory called LICENSE 
or LICENSE.txt containing the text of the license. Many go further and include 
the license in a comment at the start of each file that allows comments.

Original comment by dhasenan@gmail.com on 18 Feb 2015 at 11:46

[GoogleCodeExporter]

There are 3,4 files taken from "spring's base content." 
Those have all their original info at start of file and are "licensed under the 
terms of the GNU GPL, v2 or later."

The other files/models/textures/scripts by me have IMO not a high enough "level 
of creativity" to justify a license. 

As a tutorial/template/collection of examples it was of course meant to be read 
or re-used. 
Comperable to a "Hello, world!" tutorial it might teach something or save time 
or provide a starting-point but it would be far stretched to see any further 
work as "derivative work."

So I guess it is public domain.

Original comment by anmeldek...@web.de on 24 Feb 2015 at 2:23