Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
"Don" wrote
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Don <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Let's not forget the licensing issues. Tango is incompatible with some
developers license wise, as you must include attribution for Tango in
any
derivative works (i.e. compiled binaries).
Are you sure? Where is that written down? I can't find that anywhere in
the
Tango license.
Probably this:
6. Attribution Rights. You must retain, in the Source Code of any
Derivative Works that You create, all copyright, patent, or trademark
notices from the Source Code of the Original Work, as well as any
notices of licensing and any descriptive text identified therein as an
"Attribution Notice." You must cause the Source Code for any
Derivative Works that You create to carry a prominent Attribution
Notice reasonably calculated to inform recipients that You have
modified the Original Work.
I think it's just saying you can't remove stuff from the source code
that says who wrote it. But it's got a thick legal accent that's a
little difficult to understand.
Yes, it explicitly states that it's source code-only requirement.
Perhaps the page should include an approximate explanation, to remove
confusion
I'm not a lawyer, but I think that the artistic license requires source
redistribution (I agree the license is difficult to comprehend), whereas the
BSD style license requires attribution with binaries. So either way, you
must provide attribution. Some companies may frown upon that, especially
when we're talking about a standard library.
I've read the BSD license very carefully and I think it only requires
attribution with binary distributions of the library, not apps written
with the library. If I'm wrong I'd love to know, because druntime is
currently BSD licensed (something I've been meaning to reconsider).
Sean
