I for one, have my directories un-readable for non-members. I would consider it polite to not go snooping in others code without permission. What is publicly exposed in their public_html is fine, but otherwise its rude.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Rainer Rillke <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes, it clearly states that all software has to be under an Open > > Source license. But I see no requirement that the software has to be > > publicly released anywhere, although it would presumably be > > permissible under the required Open Source license for anyone else > > with access to it on Labs to publicly redistribute it. > > There is an important misconception: Never assume the author licensed > their code implicitly because the Terms of Use required them to only use > open Source software on Labs or because it's linked to a component > requiring copyleft. Only the author is able to grant a license but if > they refuse to for code one got into ones fingers or if they are > obviously closed source software, the right course of action here would > be to drop their software from Labs immediately. > > One question remains, though: What to do if file permissions are set in > a way one can't see the code... or, as suggested it is compiled and/or > obfuscated. Would that be against Lab's spirit of promoting openSource? > > _______________________________________________ > Labs-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l >
_______________________________________________ Labs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
