I'm happy the way things are. David etc. seem to be doing a good job of pointing new projects in the direction of existing similar projects when appropriate.
Producing code that others could reuse and extend seems like a good trade for free hosting etc. I believe the community here behaves how I expect, e.g. we talk to each if we borrow code, or if we want to extend a project. Those members of the community who don't behave this way won't be stopped by a different license, so I don't see any value to adding it. If you have novel features that you want to keep exclusive to your extension - write your extension in C++ - or don't write an extension, write an application I suspect there may also be issues with applying such a license to code which was based upon other extensions which were licenced differently. e.g. example extension from some of the help pages. I also suspect that we may offer different levels of assistance to those who don't want to give back. It would probably be best to treat following/reading/thinking about advise from the mailing list as accepting an Open Source licence for you code... A On 30/04/06, Eric H. Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I second the idea to opening mozdev to licenses which require source code to be open, but disallow its reuse. What constitues reuse? I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. But clearly there's a definition (look at the whole SCO / System5 / Linux legal battle)
_______________________________________________ Project_owners mailing list [email protected] http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
