search

quickhac / qhac-common

Common libraries for use in QuickHAC applications
3 stars 1 forks source link

License #2

Closed xsznix closed 10 years ago

xsznix commented 10 years ago

What should we license this code under? I'm leaning toward GPL or MPL.

Here's a simplified comparison of OSS licenses: http://choosealicense.com/licenses/

tristanseifert commented 10 years ago

How about the 3-clause BSD license? The GPL is needlessly parasitic and overly complicated, and the BSD license would allow people more freedom with using this code with other licenses.

xsznix commented 10 years ago

I just don't want people ripping off our work and re-releasing it under sketchy but technically legal terms and profiting off it. That's my primary concern. What do you think of MPL?

xsznix commented 10 years ago

We could also consider LGPL, since this is a library.

tristanseifert commented 10 years ago

I fail to see what the issue with releasing under the three-clause BSD license is: The GPL is completely parasitic and requires any derivative works to ALSO be licensed under the GPL, and is just a general heap of blech.

The BSD license, however, requires that the copyright notice (and license text in full) be reproduced in the source files if distributing it in source, or somewhere else in the binary (about box, for example) if distributing it as part of a binary. Additionally, it relieves us from any kind of liability if/when our code kills someone's cat or something.

Honestly, though, why go out of our way to prevent people from profiting from our code, if the copyright notices must be intact? I see where you're coming from, but with the BSD license they couldn't just take our code, claim it as their own and sell it; but it still would allow them to incorporate it into a for-profit product.

xsznix commented 10 years ago

m, sure, let's go with that. Does BSD 3-clause for everything sound okay with everybody?

mdciotti commented 10 years ago

That sounds fine. It looks mostly the same as MPL in terms of what it expressly permits and forbids, which I was leaning towards, but BSD is way shorter. I don't know if that's good or bad, but if we are putting the license at the top of every file, go with BSD. Otherwise (if it is just a single LICENSE file) I would take a look at MPL.

tristanseifert commented 10 years ago

I wouldn't think there's a difference between the way you do it. I don't remember the license text off the top of my head, but I doubt it will matter if we have just a single LICENSE file, if we clarify that the license pertains to the entirety of the project.

xsznix commented 10 years ago

I think we decided on BSD 3-clause, so I'm closing this issue.