(This is long, gnarly thread, but I just like to think about this sort of stuff, what can I say...)
On 05/27/2016 09:05 AM, Walter Bender wrote: > This has been the topic of a lot of discussion on the FOSS foundation list > of late. I think there is a movement afoot to push them towards a default > FOSS license. This is interesting: http://250bpm.com/blog:82 Shows a graph of decline of software published on GitHub with any license at all. I think a repo needs to make its users choose a license--any license--but should not publish publicly until a license has been chosen. The "default" is a suggestion for convenience. Defaults do have implications for what choices people make, but right now the "default" is "no license at all" (ambiguous to its community and legally proprietary).
_______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
