Hello, On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 09:10:05AM -0000, Peleg Michaeli wrote: > I see... > > Well, first of all, I apologize: I thought you are a lawyer (maybe because > you have written that you are software licensing expert somewhere?)
Probably not, but maybe I should disclaim it more often. > Anyway, Expat license is definitely not good enough for me. It is NOT > all-permissive; for example, in this line: > "The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in > all copies or substantial portions of the Software". > > Anyway, there's a good reason that licenses are not all-permissive. Why > would day? If one intends to give all of the permissions, or in other words > - release all of his "rights", than why should he use a "license"? > > So I (we, actually - I'm not alone, I am only a representative of about 7 > people that are now working on this project) decided to release it to the > public domain. As I have seen in GNU site, it IS compatible with GNU > licenses; hence you should "allow" us to do that - moreover, I have seen a > few projects in Savannah that are partially in the public domain (one that I > have checked didn't even bother to put a notice in his files, except for > "this file is in the public domain" and that's it...). > > So - I have sent you this notice for 2 purposes: > a. to hear your opinion; if you say you're not a lawyer, maybe I should get > one? Do you know anyone that is a free software "activist", and will read it > and give his opinion? > b. for you to approve it; I remind you that you asked me to fix my "license" > before I upload files... well, I am NOT uploading files to Savannah, but I > am using its facilities, hence I want to clarify this issue. > > If you have an answer to "a", I will talk to him/her before I will upload > this notice. Otherwise, I will look for someone myself, and if I won't find > one, I will want to use this notice as it is, but that is conditioned by > your answer to "b"... :-) I sent mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], who can provide suggestions based on their experience asking for best practices to release code in the public domain. You are in carbon-copy :) It's not about 'allowing' public domain at Savannah, it's about avoiding ambiguity. When you write a new license header this becomes something new that needs to be carefully analysed by different people, as I mentioned, hence why I suggested using the widespread Expat which is a no-brainer for such people. I didn't mean to reject public domain as an acceptable licensing scheme for Savannah project. Probably a no-frills "this file is in the public domain" would work, but let's hear from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Sylvain
