On Friday, 17 June 2016 at 22:15:47 UTC, ketmar wrote:
i put it under unlicense[1], as some other works of the same
author is using it, and it is basically the same PD.
[1] http://unlicense.org/
Unfortunately, using unlicense is just as problematic as using
public domain:
https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/147111/what-is-wrong-with-the-unlicense
The next best thing is the CC0 license (Creative Commons Zero)
which is better written than unlicense but it's currently not
recommended for software / source code.
http://copyfree.org/content/standard/licenses/cc0/license.txt
After that, the most-open licenses with good legal standing would
be Boost and MIT but then you run into the same issues again with
incompatible licenses.
I don't have any recommendations but I thought it was worth
pointing out that unlicense isn't the solution here.
