On Wednesday, 25 November 2015 at 18:06:45 UTC, Wild wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 November 2015 at 16:18:56 UTC, Piotrek wrote:
Hi,
No worries :) Feel free to use whatever license you want. It
is your code.
However my point was that the code released with license other
than Boost (or similar) cannot be included in Phobos. That's
one thing. The second is, non liberal licenses put burden on
commercial adoption and put risk on legal actions. I know that
from the employee POV who worked for many corporations and was
obliged to follow the rules.
The bottom line is that viral licenses (with varying
aggressiveness) are in opposition to business. Yes, I know GPL
is used by companies but the cost is high. To use analogy: you
can live with viruses, but you need money for medicines.
BTW. Sorry if I sounded to harsh and forgive me stealing your
announcement for my propaganda ;) I'll try to figure out a way
to present my ideas in proper way before I have to many
enemies.
Piotrek
No offense taken.
It's important for a project to have a fitting license.
I chose MPLv2 because I like the code to be free like BSD, for
it to be able to be located in all sorts of project, but I
still want the code to remain open source.
I will maybe change the license in the future, if needed.
But currently I don't see a reason to do it.
- Dan
For phobos contributions it doesn't really matter what licence
the code previously had as long as you can give permission for it
to be used, which is easy if you're the only author. The
difficulty comes when you have many authors over many years and
you need to get all their permissions.
