diff -u sic-0.9/LICENSE sic-0.9-ipv6/LICENSE
--- sic-0.9/LICENSE 2007-02-13 17:02:16.0 +0100
+++ sic-0.9-ipv6/LICENSE2008-05-19 13:32:09.0 +0200
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
MIT/X Consortium License
-(C)opyright MMV-MMVI Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+(C)opyright MMV-MMVIII
Hi Sylvain,
any chance to let us agree on the MIT license for the IPv6 bits?
Kind regards,
Anselm
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 01:51:18PM +0200, Sylvain Bertrand wrote:
diff -u sic-0.9/LICENSE sic-0.9-ipv6/LICENSE
--- sic-0.9/LICENSE 2007-02-13 17:02:16.0 +0100
+++
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Sylvain,
any chance to let us agree on the MIT license for the IPv6 bits?
Ok, make it all MIT ( 10 lines... :) ), but you should really consider
GPLv3 instead of MIT, just because we don't live in a perfect world...
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 04:02:51PM +0200, Sylvain Bertrand wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Sylvain,
any chance to let us agree on the MIT license for the IPv6 bits?
Ok, make it all MIT ( 10 lines... :) ), but you should really consider
Why don't you just use the beerware license? It's really easy to
understand. And you will get a lot more out of it.
use single GPL licensed software, use Linux and secure your digital freedom!
You think this is freedom?
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 10:49:37AM -0400, hiro wrote:
Why don't you just use the beerware license? It's really easy to
understand. And you will get a lot more out of it.
I should consider dual-licensing it with the beer license ;)
--
Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key:
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 4:52 PM, hiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
use single GPL licensed software, use Linux and secure your digital freedom!
You think this is freedom?
Freedom which does not defend itself *will* be abused again and again,
and after 15 years of software engineering, I said it's
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 05:17:18PM +0200, Sylvain Bertrand wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 4:52 PM, hiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
use single GPL licensed software, use Linux and secure your digital
freedom!
You think this is freedom?
Freedom which does not defend itself *will* be
Hello Anshelm,
* Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-05-19 16:33:36 +0200]:
My licensing reasons are rather pragmatic, the reasons why I
don't use the GPL* are:
1) I don't understand it completely and in any detail. So I
stick to MIT that I know and understand any impact of it.
If you
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Sylvain Bertrand
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Freedom which does not defend itself *will* be abused again and again,
Define abuse? According to MIT/BSD, using the code in closed source
products is not abuse, it's simply use. Since that does not in any way
affect the
Define abuse? According to MIT/BSD, using the code in closed source
products is not abuse, it's simply use. Since that does not in any way
affect the freedom of the original MIT/BSD licensed code, it shouldn't
be a problem. Unless, of course, you want to restrict the users of
your code in
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 07:57:43PM +0200, Enno Gottox Boland wrote:
Define abuse? According to MIT/BSD, using the code in closed source
products is not abuse, it's simply use. Since that does not in any way
affect the freedom of the original MIT/BSD licensed code, it shouldn't
be a
13 matches
Mail list logo
