In theory i agree with you but changing license of an existing open source project is not too easy to do if you'd like to do it properly. If i'm not mistaken then all persons who have contributed in the past should be contacted and asked about their approval for example.
J. On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Charles S van der Linden <[email protected] > wrote: > Due to work I'm doing for the Kuali Student project (Kuali.org) I'm > having to review licenses for all the code we plan to use or are using > for test automation. Something I noticed in the process of doing > this is that we are using different licenses for Watir and > Watir-webdriver. > > It occurs to me that it might be a lot more consistent if we moved to > using the same license for all code under the watir repositiory on > Github provided we can agree on what license to use. I'm fine with > either BSD 3-clause or MIT, I just think we should pick one and use it > for all code under the watir repository so we are consistent. We > should also specifically state which license we are using, which makes > it easier for anyone that has to care about such things, perhaps even > with a link back to the license's page at opensource.org > > Watir appears to be (and older version of?) the BSD 3-clause license > (or at least I think that's what it is, since we don't state > explicitly which BSD license we are using ) See > http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause for the official > template. > > Watir-Webdriver does not specifiy which license it is, but it appears > to me to be the MIT license http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT > > for reference licenses for associated projects are: > > Selenium is using the Apache 2.0 license > http://opensource.org/licenses/Apache-2.0 which has a lot more > legalize in it including stuff relating to patent licensing, etc. I > think it's likely overkill for us. > > Cucumber, is using the MIT license > > Cheezy's Page-Objects gem appears to be MIT license also (but does not > explicitly state that) > > > In case you care: > This all comes up for me in part because Kuali uses their own special > license (ECL). The educational community had a small issue with the > patent clause in the Apache license, causing them to create their own > license (ECL 2.0) which is the Apache license with a small > modification to the patent clause (for the curious > http://opensource.org/licenses/ECL-2.0) > _______________________________________________ > Wtr-development mailing list > [email protected] > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development >
_______________________________________________ Wtr-development mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development
