Hi everyone we have a couple of files in Octave Forge with non-standard licenses. This is bad. Being able to give it a recognisable name not only eases our organisation but also its acceptance by downstream package maintainers such as Debian. From Debian's upstream guide "Please do not write your own license text if you can at all avoid it. Depending on your wishes, the GPL, LGPL or a BSD-style license will most likely be appropriate, and it is far easier to tell whether something is allowed if we can look at past discussions of the same text. "
I believe that in most cases such user-made licenses are not made because there's no appropriate license out there, but out of indifference for the subject and belief on others better part. For example, some functions in the image package have the following license "This code has no warrany whatsoever. Do what you like with this code as long as you leave this copyright in place" which could easily be replaced by something such as the simplified BSD, FreeBSD or ICS license which I have already suggested to the original author. I'd like to propose that we no longer accept such non-standard licenses and propose this list http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses as the ones that are acceptable. Does anyone oppose to such change? Carnë ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ WINDOWS 8 is here. Millions of people. Your app in 30 days. Visit The Windows 8 Center at Sourceforge for all your go to resources. http://windows8center.sourceforge.net/ join-generation-app-and-make-money-coding-fast/ _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
