On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:24 AM, <josef.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Charles R Harris > <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Worth a read at A&D. > > Thanks, it is worth a read. > > Most of the time when I see code copied from scipy or statsmodels, it is > properly attributed. > But every once in a while (like just now) I see code in an interesting > sounding package on github where I start to recognize parts because they > have my code comments still left in but don't have an attribution to the > origin. > > It's almost ok if it's MIT or BSD licensed because then I can "borrow back" > the changes, but not if the new license is GPL.
I'm not sure I fully agree about the GPL thing (I understand and sympathize with how annoying it is, but when we fight for BSD licensing then what are we fighting for if not for the right of random people to take our stuff and without letting us "borrow back" changes?), but more importantly it should be noted: People who take MIT/BSD licensed code and strip off the attribution are actually violating the license. This is pretty much the only thing you can do that violates the license, but they're doing it. Better practice is to keep a list of places where code was taken from, and the licenses governing its use, in your LICENSE.txt file: https://github.com/pydata/patsy/blob/master/LICENSE.txt https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/COPYRIGHT -n -- Nathaniel J. Smith -- http://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
