Please change licensing... p0052* was not meant to be GPL'd

alsliahona commented 6 years ago

I'd like to request that you change the license on your implementation of p0052r8 (scope_guard and unique_resource). There are obviously many implementations of these in existence. I've been using my implementations for years in commercial code. The reason for this request: By slapping the GPL on it you:

Limit access to your implementation to non-commercial, open-source use
Risk having compiler vendors NOT implement scope_guard / unique_resource for fear of tangling with the GPL they found on your version

In addition, I'm sure you will find others interested in using your implementation who can't currently use it because it is GPL encumbered.

I would suggest making it Public Domain the way the P0052 (and prior) papers and sample implementations have been. If you feel the need for a license, please use one that is open and free like the MIT license. This is especially true if your implementation borrows from the public domain example implementations that were published with earlier drafts of P0052 and predecessors.

Thank You Much, Andrew Sandoval

offa commented 6 years ago

Hey @alsliahona, thanks for this detailed request. This makes totally sense to me and I see no issues against changing the license. 👍

I still want to maintain the ability to include this project into GPL'd software, so I have to figure out license compatibilities. But probably MIT should allow this!?

At this point I want to thank you, Peter and all the other contributors for your great work with this paper and your effort to get this into the standard (hopefully soon).

alsliahona commented 6 years ago

Thank you! And yes MIT is open and will allow the most freedom. It is what Peter has attached to the “reference implementation.”

Thanks much for your work and we are definitely hopeful that things go well this week in the committee meetings.

-Andrew Sandoval

On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 1:36 PM offa notifications@github.com wrote:

Hey @alsliahona https://github.com/alsliahona, thanks for this detailed request. This makes totally sense to me and I see no issues against changing the license. 👍

I still want to maintain the ability to include this project into GPL'd software, so I have to figure out license compatibilities. But probably MIT https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/ should allow this!?

At this point I want to thank you, Peter and all the other contributors for your great work with this paper and your effort to get this into the standard (hopefully soon).

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/offa/scope-guard/issues/135#issuecomment-394181977, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABxSQGJ-PcxM_yYnU5pscf2570t4PUDVks5t5Cy8gaJpZM4UXwb3 .

-- Andrew L. Sandoval sandoval@netwaysglobal.com

[image: qrcode] http://mormon.org/me/72HW/

offa commented 6 years ago

The license is changed to MIT now.

Thanks much for your work and we are definitely hopeful that things go well this week in the committee meetings.

I keep my fingers crossed 🤞

offa / scope-guard

Please change licensing... p0052* was not meant to be GPL'd #135

I still want to maintain the ability to include this project into GPL'd software, so I have to figure out license compatibilities. But probably MIT https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/ should allow this!?