Re: OT: Open Source Apple Mods
Re: OT: Open Source Apple Mods
- Subject: Re: OT: Open Source Apple Mods
- From: Paul Skinner <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 23:24:03 -0400
on 10/25/01 1:08 PM, Michael Sullivan wrote:
>
> Look, open source is great and all, but please don't limit these scripts
>
> to "free" uses as the polluting GPL does. Please consider a BSD or Apple
>
> style license that allows the mods to be used in for-pay work. My
>
> employers refuse to allow the use of any GPL code because they like
>
> getting paid back for the labor they underwrite. I'd like to get more
>
> work done by using Apple Mods, either under the public domain (as I'd
>
> wager they legally are without an explicit GPL statement) or under a
>
> BSD-derived license.
>
>
Hear, hear.
>
>
The standard thing I'd like to do with any of my own code that ends up
>
there, or elsewhere for public consumption is open source BSD style.
>
i.e. you may use it, modify it, even sell things that use it, but
>
anything using it *must* include notices about who wrote it, and where
>
to find the original source for free, and alerting the consumer that
>
that portion of the code is open source and freely available, and clear
>
indications about what is and is not modified, if anything.
>
>
GPL restricts any re-use of code except for free, which means I couldn't
>
legally use it for consulting work, only in-house. I realize that in
>
practice they don't enforce this except against IP hoarding productivity
>
killers like Microsloth. But the language is still there, and taken
>
literally it means you can't do anything but in-house or free work with
>
it.
>
>
Michael, rms is a great programmer but a bit of a nut-job when it comes
>
to economics.
I think that the GNU Lesser GPL license is appropriate for the Mods. It
avoids the issues that you raise.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.txt
--
Paul Skinner