[U2] Free software licence
All I've been planning for a while to release my system scanning tools (mvScan) as free/open software. That way, anyone can download and use it and hopefully people can choose to add to the library of plug-ins that are used to analyse specific entities - an example might be some plug-ins to add SB+ or SBXA tools into the map, neither of which I currently use. In fact, it's one of a number of tools I want to make freely available in the same way. The only stumbling block I'm hitting is trying to choose a licence. With so many 'open source' and 'free software' licences out there, I've just ended up getting more and more confused as I read more about the differences. All I want is a simple licence that will have the usual attribution and indemnity clauses, whilst allowing anyone to modify the software as they please and give it out as they see fit. I'm considering the MIT licence for the simple reason that it's short and to the point - but when I see it next to the likes of the CDDL I'm left wondering whether it is enough? Has anyone any insight to share on this? Confused Brian ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Free software licence
On 10/17/2010 7:13 AM, Brian Leach wrote: All I've been planning for a while to release my system scanning tools (mvScan) as free/open software. That way, anyone can download and use it and hopefully people can choose to add to the library of plug-ins that are used to analyse specific entities - an example might be some plug-ins to add SB+ or SBXA tools into the map, neither of which I currently use. In fact, it's one of a number of tools I want to make freely available in the same way. The only stumbling block I'm hitting is trying to choose a licence. With so many 'open source' and 'free software' licences out there, I've just ended up getting more and more confused as I read more about the differences. All I want is a simple licence that will have the usual attribution and indemnity clauses, whilst allowing anyone to modify the software as they please and give it out as they see fit. I'm considering the MIT licence for the simple reason that it's short and to the point - but when I see it next to the likes of the CDDL I'm left wondering whether it is enough? Has anyone any insight to share on this? Confused Brian ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users One major difference with the different licenses is how they treat commercial use. You can choose whether you want to allow bundling or redistribution for profit. I like the Apache license, it is pretty short as well. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Free software licence
On 10/17/2010 7:13 AM, Brian Leach wrote: All I've been planning for a while to release my system scanning tools (mvScan) as free/open software. That way, anyone can download and use it and hopefully people can choose to add to the library of plug-ins that are used to analyse specific entities - an example might be some plug-ins to add SB+ or SBXA tools into the map, neither of which I currently use. In fact, it's one of a number of tools I want to make freely available in the same way. The only stumbling block I'm hitting is trying to choose a licence. With so many 'open source' and 'free software' licences out there, I've just ended up getting more and more confused as I read more about the differences. All I want is a simple licence that will have the usual attribution and indemnity clauses, whilst allowing anyone to modify the software as they please and give it out as they see fit. I'm considering the MIT licence for the simple reason that it's short and to the point - but when I see it next to the likes of the CDDL I'm left wondering whether it is enough? Has anyone any insight to share on this? Confused Brian ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users I am checking with some friends who distribute software their opinions. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Free software licence
This looks interesting http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/how-to-pick-an-open-source-license-part-2/131?tag=mantle_skin;content ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Free software licence
On 10/17/2010 7:13 AM, Brian Leach wrote: All I've been planning for a while to release my system scanning tools (mvScan) as free/open software. That way, anyone can download and use it and hopefully people can choose to add to the library of plug-ins that are used to analyse specific entities - an example might be some plug-ins to add SB+ or SBXA tools into the map, neither of which I currently use. In fact, it's one of a number of tools I want to make freely available in the same way. The only stumbling block I'm hitting is trying to choose a licence. With so many 'open source' and 'free software' licences out there, I've just ended up getting more and more confused as I read more about the differences. All I want is a simple licence that will have the usual attribution and indemnity clauses, whilst allowing anyone to modify the software as they please and give it out as they see fit. I'm considering the MIT licence for the simple reason that it's short and to the point - but when I see it next to the likes of the CDDL I'm left wondering whether it is enough? Has anyone any insight to share on this? Confused Brian ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users The consensus in my LUG is MIT/BSD is good. Some of the projects that use it are FSpot, Banshee, Mono. Pretty good endorsement. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Free software licence
On 17/10/10 12:13, Brian Leach wrote: All I've been planning for a while to release my system scanning tools (mvScan) as free/open software. That way, anyone can download and use it and hopefully people can choose to add to the library of plug-ins that are used to analyse specific entities - an example might be some plug-ins to add SB+ or SBXA tools into the map, neither of which I currently use. In fact, it's one of a number of tools I want to make freely available in the same way. The only stumbling block I'm hitting is trying to choose a licence. With so many 'open source' and 'free software' licences out there, I've just ended up getting more and more confused as I read more about the differences. All I want is a simple licence that will have the usual attribution and indemnity clauses, whilst allowing anyone to modify the software as they please and give it out as they see fit. Strong copyleft or weak, or not copyleft at all. I'm considering the MIT licence for the simple reason that it's short and to the point - but when I see it next to the likes of the CDDL I'm left wondering whether it is enough? What extra protection does the CDDL give? Most of the extra verbiage in the newer licences is due to the Americans getting themselves in a twist over patents - which are illegal in Europe (that doesn't stop the EPO granting them, though). Has anyone any insight to share on this? I'd probably go for either MIT or LGPL in your shoes. MIT gives freedom to the *developer* - any other software guy can take your code, put it in his product, and keep the innovations, bug fixes etc private to himself. LGPL gives freedom to the *code* - while any other software guy can take your code, put it in his product, and keep *his* *product* to himself, any fixes/mods/improvements he makes to your code, he has to share with his customers. I'd also add that MIT/BSD/GPL are well understood licences. The CDDL somewhat less so. The fact you didn't even mention GPL as an option makes me think MIT will be closest to what you want (that, and I think that the CDDL is a GPL-like licence...) Cheers, Wol ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] XLr8Editor and Tools Updates
I like watching sparks fly ... bright or otherwise :-) Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage Better by Design! -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Symeon Breen Sent: Saturday, 16 October 2010 8:23 PM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] XLr8Editor and Tools Updates Here here From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Brenda Price Sent: 15 October 2010 22:06 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] XLr8Editor and Tools Updates Begin Cyber-spanking: I personally saw nothing wrong with Tony's first response. I did however with Doug's first reply addressing Tony's post, then the resulting salvos from both sides. I suggest both refine from personal attacks, it is not professional. End Cyber-spanking ;) Sincerely, Brenda L Price UniVerse Lead Programmer Rapid Response Team Market America, Inc. Greensboro, NC U2 User Group Board Member - u2ug.org -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Doug Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 4:48 PM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] XLr8Editor and Tools Updates Tony: This is technical list and you responded as you always do, as a know it all. I never said I did not know how to do links nor did I say I need help in figuring out how to send an attachment. So what are you responding to? Tony, next time read the post! Regards, Doug www.u2logic.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:03 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] XLr8Editor and Tools Updates From: Doug daverch-at-hotmail.com Hi Tony: Nice to see you cannot let anything go. Still holding on to the ex-girlfriend's picture? WTF was that about? I was responding to what was presented as a technical problem. This list service does not allow attachments and is in plain text. The next time you want people to contact you, just say so, don't make excuses that make you sound technically inept - and don't get huffy if someone posts a solution to a problem that you've presented. Are you still sore because some years ago I gave you grief about baiting people with freeware and then changing your model to buyware after people started using it? Really man, that was a long time ago. Let it go. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users _ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1136 / Virus Database: 422/3198 - Release Date: 10/15/10 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
