Closed vogella closed 6 years ago
I'm really not familiar with licenses... Is the current MIT License not appropriated ?
For Eclipse plug-ins the EPL is usually preferable. This avoids discussions about reusing this code in other Eclipse projects.
I thought that the MIT License was the most open possible license available, that is was something like: "do what you want with the code". I'll have to study the differences between the two before I take any decisions.
Actually I have to get up to speed with the project again. I'm pleased to see that the project went on without me :) I have to learn about Tycho and Market Place.
Don't worry about Tycho, our build is running based on what you just merged.
MIT is very open. AFAIK for example I could re-license my Github fork myself to the EPL and continue to work on it.
Eclipse projects typically only use EPL code directly to avoid any license discussion. Like yourself and myself, nobody want to learn the details about the different licenses.
Here is the description of the update site for the vogella continous integration build: http://www.vogella.com/tutorials/DocBook/article.html#languagetool_installation
Then I'll modify the project with EPL license soon, it's better to comply with the standards.
I just understand why the name Vogella rang a bell, I used the documentation on your website to make this plugin.
I used the documentation on your website to make this plugin.
:-) And now your plug-in is helping to improve the spelling of vogella.com
Could you use the EPL as your license?