I haven't given much attention to them. I know Click uses MIT (I am pretty
sure). For a quick comparison check the following document.

http://www.mcgill.ca/files/science/RIO-communique-26Jan09.pdf

I guess MIT looks better.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexis Malozemoff [mailto:amalozemo...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 1:26 PM
To: Muthucumaru Maheswaran
Cc: gini-devel@cs.mcgill.ca
Subject: Re: [Gini-devel] 2.0.1 release

How about the MIT or BSD license?  Those are pretty permissive.

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Muthucumaru Maheswaran
<mahes...@cs.mcgill.ca> wrote:
> I see we are using the GPL licence. There are others like LGPL. We might
> want to use
> a "liberal" licence in case a strict one like GPL makes GINI less
> attractive.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gini-devel-boun...@cs.mcgill.ca
> [mailto:gini-devel-boun...@cs.mcgill.ca] On Behalf Of Alexis Malozemoff
> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 1:14 PM
> To: gini-devel@cs.mcgill.ca
> Subject: [Gini-devel] 2.0.1 release
>
> I merged the devel/ branch to stable/ for GINI version 2.0.1.
> Please try it out to make sure everything works; so far it's worked
> for me.  I will also update the website.
>
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> gini-devel mailing list
> gini-devel@cs.mcgill.ca
> http://mailman.cs.mcgill.ca/mailman/listinfo/gini-devel
>
>

_______________________________________________
gini-devel mailing list
gini-devel@cs.mcgill.ca
http://mailman.cs.mcgill.ca/mailman/listinfo/gini-devel

Reply via email to