On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 01:33:48PM -0600, David Douthitt scribbled:
> What is the best license for a distribution such as a LEAF Project?
> I was considering the MIT License myself, and find it probably
> matches my goals best, though I'm not yet certain.
>
> Also, can you really "license" a distribution anyway? It's really
> made up of all the other programs, and they have their own licenses.
Define distribution.
distribution (n): 1. The collective sum of all the crud that
gets distributed by a given vendor etc and so on.
2. The 'glue' that holds all that stuff together, and any
components that are created or solely distributed by said
vendor.
In other words, when you license a distribution, what you're
licensing is the result of the work of putting it all together;
you're not licensing the binaries or packages that make it up.
Yes, you can license a distribution.
> Could a MIT-Licensed distribution contain GNU-Licensed binaries in
> it? Doesn't this complicate things?
The gnu-licensed binaries are gnu-licensed. The network.conf
is MIT-licensed. Putting the binaries in the directories
where you think they should go is MIT-licensed. Etc.
> The MIT License is supposedly equivalent to the newly-modified BSD
> License - which now has the advertizing clause removed.
Sounds like a good license.
> Anybody have comments or ideas?
Yes. I'm kinda tired and wish I had got to bed earlier last night.
> --
> David Douthitt
> UNIX Systems Administrator
> HP-UX, Linux, Unixware
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
rick -- A mind is like a parachute... it only works when it's open.
ICQ# 1590117 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (home)
Help with LRP: http://lrp.c0wz.com Home page: http://www.c0wz.com
_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
