Oh, guess I didn't read that far down On December 18, 2015 6:43:53 AM EST, David Hedlund <[email protected]> wrote: >From https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#WTFPL > >WTFPL, Version 2 <http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/COPYING> (#WTFPL ><https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#WTFPL>) > > This is a lax permissive non-copyleft free software license, > compatible with the GNU GPL. > > We do not recommend this license. If you want a lax permissive > license for a small program, we recommend the X11 license > <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#X11License>. A > larger program usually ought to be copyleft; but if you are set on > using a lax permissive license for one, we recommend the Apache 2.0 > license since it protects users from patent treachery. > > > > >On 2015-12-18 12:39, Julien Kyou wrote: >> This pisses me off "Choose Freedom." "Probably the best license out >there" >> >> >Copyright (C) 2004 Sam Hocevar <[email protected]> >> > >> >Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modified >> copies of this license document, and changing it is allowed as long >as >> the name is changed. >> > >> >>meaning only this document not the licensed materials >> > >> >DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE TERMS AND >CONDITIONS >FOR >> COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION >> > >> >0. You just DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO. >> >>so basically closing the source is ok? >> > >> >> wtfpl.net <http://wtfpl.net> >> >> I just learned of the existence of this licenses 30 minutes ago, so >> sorry if its not news.
-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
