Thanks Oren!
On Jan 18, 2007, at 6:49 PM, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 18:09 -0500, Hiram Chirino wrote:
...
Yeah the differences between the two get a bit complex and IANAL
too :)
But I think the biggest difference between the Licenses are that
Apache licensed software is a bit more liberal with how it can be
used. For example it allows commercial companies to make
modifications and redistribute without giving back the changes.
Which is contrary to the GPL philosophy. In essence the Apache, BSD,
and MIT licenses are more Business friendly.
So I light of that, you might not actually want to Apache License
it.. And that would be OK...
I don't feel that strongly about it. It isn't exactly the crown
jewels :-)
But if you don't mind other folks using your file (even for
commercial reasons), you would just need to also add this to the
header for us to be able to consume it:
Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
implied.
See the License for the specific language governing
permissions and
limitations under the License.
Fine, put that in there with my name (Oren Ben-Kiki) and the current
year (2007). And hopefully within a "short period of time" this
will be
in the Autoconf archive and the problem will go away.
Share & Enjoy,
Oren Ben-Kiki
