On 18/05/2010 11:31 AM, Roberto Carlos González Flores wrote: > My vote is for BSD License, but I didn't have time to check it, its only > because in most cases I would prefer BSD type Licences than viral Apache > Licenses. But I need to check the new versions. >
The Redistribution section of the Apache license adds more work than I want to do. Generally speaking I am all for as permissive as possible. Basically I don't want to have to read the license every time I do something with the code just to make sure I am following the rules. If I were world dictator I would choose a BSD style license to make it as easy as possible. For instance here is the ISC license, it is small, easy to understand, and I never ever get confused about what my responsibilities are. Copyright (c) Year(s), Company or Person's Name <E-mail address> Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE. On the other hand, The Apache 2 license is long, full of jargon which apparently needs definitions otherwise we might misconstrue particular meanings and adds more restrictions on the redistribution of the code. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
