Some time ago I heard that github is not "Open Source", so I decided to use
gitorius insted which is copylefted free software under the AGPL. At this
time I was a Mac User but I know that "if something is not open source, it is
certainly not free software." [RMS]
When I browse github, I still find lots of code that does not have a licence.
People who do care about freedom, know that you have to select a free license
to give the users freedom. It does not have to be the GPL, you can use the
LGPL, Apache License, or the MIT licence. As long the licence is compatible
with the GPL the choice of the licence is OK. Using a free licence that is
incompatible limits the use with GNU so this should not be done. Recently
Apple begin relicencing some components of Mac OS X under the Apache Licence,
so I can use them together with GNUstep.
I looked at choosealicense.com, and found out that this page uses the word
"content" that one should avoid. I think you can use the GPL for other data
which is not code, even if the data is only avialable in binary format.
