Nigel Hamilton wrote: > * a commercially positive IP licence - not something that has an > agenda (e.g., GPLv3)
What licence would you recommend? I want it to be really open. The only thing I can think of not wanting is for people to sell it as is, by itself, for profit. I'd be more than happy for it to be used commercially and to be a part of a package that is sold for profit. If that makes sense. Lyle _______________________________________________ BristolBathPM mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.bristolbath.org/mailman/listinfo/bristolbathpm
