20151113xiaodaige
moncler jackets
supra shoes
uggs outlet
louis vuitton handbags outlet
nfl jersey wholesale
hermes birkin bag
hermes outlet store
babyliss flat iron
giuseppe zanotti outlet
barbour jackets
coach outlet store
ysl outlet
tiffany and co
coach handbags outlet
pandora outlet
moncler
Yeah, there's still confusion on what an MIT License really is as the Open
Source camp just says MIT License while the Free Software camp goes no no
no, there are actually TWO licenses and no definitive MIT License
That's why I would rather go with the 2 clause (simplified) BSD license if I
You mean the MIT License right? Most people for past decade refer to the
Expat/X11 license as just MIT for simplicity.
The Expat and X11 licenses are different. The X11 license contains this
additional clause:
Except as contained in this notice, the name of the X Consortium shall
not be used in advertising or otherwise to promote the sale, use or
other dealings in this Software without prior written
I have obesrved that some hackers[2] over here are contributing scripts (in
bash, java, perl, python etc.) / patches which spans only under 100 lines of
code.
Free Software Foundation RECOMMENDS Apache License 2.0 in such cases where
the code length is less than 300 lines.[1]
Your
The FSF recommends the Apache License because it also protects against
patents. Also, note that you don't have to include a copy of the full license
with the Apache License, so the actual text you have to include is shorter
than the Expat License.
If the patch or script is contributed as part of a larger work it is sort of
customary to use the same license as the larger work.
