Re: COPYRIGHT is bogus...

[Earl Hood]

On April 5, 2000 at 21:51, "Dan Harkless" wrote:

> If not the GPL, what other open source license would be most appropriate?  X
> License?  Apache License?  BSD License?  Artistic License?  Others...?

If not the GPL, I think the Artistic License,
<http://www.perl.com/pub/language/misc/Artistic.html>, is a good
choice.  It does help preserve the identity of a package so derivative
works cannot use the same name.  This way multiple "nmh" incompatible
packages cannot exist.

Of course, whatever is decided must be okayed by Richard since he
has copyright on some of the code.

        --ewh