From: | Reece Hart <reece(at)harts(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Good F/OSS license summary |
Date: | 2008-02-01 19:17:19 |
Message-ID: | 1201893439.6460.63.camel@snafu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Folks-
A recent thread
( http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2008-01/msg01595.php )
suggests that there's a lot of interest and knowledge about F/OSS
licenses on this list. So...
Does anyone know of an authoritative, complete, and current license
comparison? After a lot of trolling, I've been able to satisfy one or
two of those criteria, but not all.
-*-mode:opinion-*-
It's disappointing that we as a community have yet to converge on just a
few licenses that differ only by the few characteristics that *really*
matter (e.g., virality, commercializability, code
reciprocation/share-alike, etc). The glut of license options and license
compatibility issues create enormous confusion and even some unfortunate
internecine FUD -- never mind the real uncertainty caused by the lack of
case law in this area. I long for a Creative Commons-like family of
licenses for code.
Thanks,
Reece
--
Reece Hart, http://harts.net/reece/, GPG:0x25EC91A0
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steve Atkins | 2008-02-01 19:30:21 | Re: Good F/OSS license summary |
Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2008-02-01 17:01:48 | Re: Is PostGreSql's Data storage mechanism "inferior"? |