MIT is as permissive as they get; I think we should use it. Should I update the repo?
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Muthucumaru Maheswaran <mahes...@cs.mcgill.ca> wrote: > 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
