I'm not sure how copyright is determined, is it just code contribution? I really like the BSD-style licenses, they don't seem to raise as many alarm bells with organisations and from what I gather Microsoft's shared source license is similar - but I am no lawyer.
---------------------------------------- - Mitch Denny - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.monash.net - +61 (414) 610141 - > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Hernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 4:02 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [nant-dev] NAnt and Ant (was: Ready to tackle > next release) > > I would say that we should just leave the old code licensed > under the old license (not change any prev. distribution that > is). Then we will go forward with the new releases under the > new license (since we are still pre-1.0). At this point the > copyright holders number just a few. I feel like we should > probably keep this number down, but above 1; we really need > to keep good track of who these people are, and how to > contact them just for these types of reasons. > > As for libs that are gpl'd, I think we can get around this. > It just means we need to remove it from the dist and require > a sep download from the real source. There are a few other > small changes so we don't step over our license boundaries, > but I think it manageable. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Philip Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 10:50 AM > Subject: Re: [nant-dev] NAnt and Ant (was: Ready to tackle > next release) > > > > > > > Well, to be honest : I don't have a clue ... That's > perhaps why we're > still > > > stuck with the GPL license :-) > > > > I am pretty sure the copyright holder can do whatever they > want, so long > as > > they aren't bound to the gpl by other source code or > libraries in the > > application. NAnt may be bound to the gpl because of > things like the > > sharpcvslib. There's also the issue of source code that > may have been > copied. > > Does anybody know where all the source comes from? > > > > > > > > I did have a quick look at the licensing stuff, and to me > it seems like > a > > > BSD-style license is the most open license ... > > > > I would summarize it as "do want you want with this code, > and you can't > sue me" > > with an unwritten correlary of "I don't want your crummy > enhancements to > my > > code". It is definately my preference to use BSD or Apache licenses. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. > SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. > See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: > Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php > _______________________________________________ > nant-developers mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php _______________________________________________ nant-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
