Code needs a licence, as does the text, data licence needs including

richfitz commented 10 years ago

I vote for MIT licence for the code: any objections? (ping: @mwpennell and @wcornwell)
I guess we should licence the text too. CC-BY? As for model adequacy?
The data licence must be CC0 because that's what we agree to with Dryad anyway, but that needs adding.

If no objections I'll sort that out tomorrow.

mwpennell commented 10 years ago

No objections. The more open the better

richfitz commented 10 years ago

Well OK then. tumblr_n0lia5xhwm1sbr00to1_250

richfitz commented 10 years ago

Hmm - according to this we might run into trouble with J Ecol with a CC-BY licence as we have to give them exclusive licence:

posting of revised versions of the article on a preprint server with a CC-BY licence might affect an author’s ability to sign an Exclusive Licence to publish in a BES journal

Surely the existence of the code here conflicts with this? I'm (obviously) no lawyer, but if things are up on github that kind of implies distribution.

So probably best to be vague about the text licencing (unless you feel like following this up with Lauren, @mwpennell).

richfitz commented 10 years ago

OK, with 096602d this is done aside from the text. Waiting to hear back from the journal about this, but may have to just be vague.

richfitz commented 10 years ago

Looks like CC-BY on the text is not OK. Staying with being vague.

richfitz / wood

Code needs a licence, as does the text, data licence needs including #8