Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Tim Starling <[email protected]> > wrote: >> The GPL, being by far the most restrictive free license, seems to be >> for people who have reservations about giving their code away. The GPL >> seeks to maintain a sense of ownership and control, by restricting >> many kinds of derivative reuse and by mandating attribution. I'm not >> going to be bullied into making it my preferred license for new code. > > Well, it would be nice if you at least specified the license. > ImageMap, for instance, has no license specified at all. Presumably > it's intended to be licensed under something that's at least > GPL-compatible, but it's not clear what. This is problematic given > that other people have modified it, and how they intended to license > their contributions isn't necessarily clear if there's no license > anywhere in the text of the code. I can't see any good reason to not > specify a license.
I haven't yet found a license that I like enough to support in that way. Here's a statement of my position on licenses: <http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Tim_Starling#Source_code_license> -- Tim Starling _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
