Closed manumerous closed 3 years ago
Anyways I will make a new branch so we do not have the GPL in the commit history.
@manumerous I tend to label most of my work as BSD, since I care more about my work being used than gaining credit for it. If you care more about acknowledgement, maybe Apache is a better license.
If this is okay for you, probably BSD is a good license for our purpose (also easier to move into PX4).
I think BSD is okay. Currently my name is anyways mentioned as the author in every file and it will also be shown in the commit history what i did. I guess that should be acknowledgement enough. :)
@manumerous Lets keep this open until we resolve the license issue on this repo :smile:
@manumerous Note that the FW Dynamics Plugin is a Apache licensed code, so this repo is already kind of apache licensed
Thanks for pointing this out and reopening the Issue. I added my files for now under the BSD license. I guess it should not be a problem if we change this later? Or should there never be other licenses in the commit history?
@manumerous Since this repo has never been distributed I think the commit history doesn't really matter.
We own the code, so we can change the license as we want. (Except for the FWDynamicsPlugin
code)
Some people squash all the commit history when they release the work as a workaround, so something to think about later :wink:
Okay thank you for your insights!
@manumerous Closing since I believe this has been resolved
Dear Jay,
Today I had a closer look at the problem with the software licenses you mentioned last week in the meeting using your link. I agree that GPL is probably not the best option here. I think I just used it since I was most familiar with that license from the Linux environment.
Both the MIT and BSD license seem fine to me. Do you have any strong preference? I guess BSD could be better to stay consistent with the PX4 ecosystem.