Re: License blurb (was: Release, 3rd draft)

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 02:58:56PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > >
> > > Too negative. We want to emphasize the positives of *our* license while not
> > > criticizing other people's.
> >
> > One issue is that many people seem to equate the two, so I think it's
> > going to be difficult/impossible to not have some negative verbage about
> > other licenses. But, I'll give it a shot...
>
> See my last post. It isn't that hard. You just completely ignore the
> fact that the GPL even exists or any other license for that matter.
>
> There is only one open source license for this PR and that is the BSD
> license. We don't even have to mention the others.

Well, the original request was for something to go on the website and
specifically not in the PR. As such, the effect I want is for people to
actively investigate what the different licensing schemes mean, and to
ensure people understand that we're very different from the GPL (and
understand what restrictions other licenses have for those not aware).
That's why I think it's important to mention other licenses.

I do think your blurb would be great for the PR though.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461