On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 08:40:00PM +0200, Paul de Weerd wrote: > On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote: > | Keeping authorship for a resume sounds like a somewhat good reason > | to me. I think you could also use public domain code for a resume, > | but that may have it's downsides. My question is something like: is > | keeping copyright worth putting the annoying license in every file? > > Calling it an "annoying license" is somewhat disrespectful. If you > find the license annoying, don't use the work. Disrespectful is a funny word for it. The point is: the ISC license sucks less.. (than any other license, I think) I'm thinking if public domain would suck less than a permissive license.
> I do this quite often, > in fact, not use some piece of software because I don't like the > license. Me too. When I'm looking for a piece of software (like a webbrowser), I'm most of the time first looking for a permissive license. > | > All files require a copyright and license notice. > | True, but is the name of the license, or the name + URL enough? Than you > | could replace the whole ISC license with just the line like: > | # This file is ISC-licensed. > > And who wrote "This file" ? You seem to have forgotten the copyright > notice. The part where it says (c) 2008, <whomever>. Idd, I've forgotten. > | This would make one reason for using public domain less; It won't safe > | lines in textfiles. > > What is so annoying about a few lines of text in a source file ? I dunno, somewhat the same thing as HTHL is annoying for it verbosity. I'm an obsessive minimalist I think.. (I've been thinking about using Plan9 wich is more minimalistic, (and has a better design I think) but it's license is yuck) > Yeah, just "being Dutch" and all... ;) ..:) Whatever.
