materialpoll.tk
materialpoll.tk
materialpoll.tk
materialpoll.tk
materialpoll.tk
LICENSE WARS LICENSE WARS LICENSE WARS
Dominic Gomez
Other urls found in this thread:
github.com
opensource.org
gnu.org
twitter.com
Julian Flores
...
Owen Wilson
/thread
cuck license never
Aaron Roberts
Why do they exist?
At least those copyleft licenses all have major differences.
Isaac Anderson
BSD 3 and 2 are for historical reasons. Almost nobody uses the old 3-clause version anymore.
ISC is closest to PD, since it doesn't have attribution clause (you don't have to credit the author).
Anthony Hughes
What's the point of a license war? The only real question is: are you OK with people grabbing your source and running off with it? If you don't care use a permissive license, I have done the same for things that just aren't really worth anything. For everything else use a copyleft license.
Cooper Gomez
ISC requires that "the above copyright notice" appears in "all copies". Isn't that an attribution clause?
CC0 is the actual closest to public domain. It doesn't just give permissions, it "overtly, fully, permanently, irrevocably and unconditionally waives, abandons, and surrenders all of Affirmer's Copyright and Related Rights and associated claims and causes of action, whether now known or unknown (including existing as well as future claims and causes of action), in the Work (i) in all territories worldwide, (ii) for the maximum duration provided by applicable law or treaty (including future time extensions), (iii) in any current or future medium and for any number of copies, and (iv) for any purpose whatsoever, including without limitation commercial, advertising or promotional purposes". It's a very thorough public domain dedication with an ultra-permissive fallback license attached to it.
Luke Edwards
Harmful poll site using non-free javascript discarded.
Use copyleft-next if you're not a politics-obsessed drooling fedoratipper.
/thread
Ethan Sanchez
...
Blake Ward
Juan Brooks
tfw i voted Proprietary
mfw
Easton Ortiz
In practice, even Apple has given back lots of code to FreeBSD. It's just easier than for them to maintain an entire separate fork.
Adrian Morales
Main diffs between BSD 2c/BSD 3c/MIT/ISC/zlib:
1. Whether or not the copyright notice needs to be shipped with binary distributions.
(For BSD 2c/3c this is required, for MIT it's ambiguous, for ISC and zlib it's not required.)
2. How your name/your organizations name/your project name may be used.
3. The license length & look. In C & C++ projects, it's common practice for short licenses to be fully included at the top of every file.
(ISC is the best one here (at tw=72, 15 lines in length, very pleasing to the eye), BSD 3c the worst.)
Chase Moore
RMS cowsay wouldn't fit on the screen.
Jeremiah Watson
Just discovered the BSD 0-clause aka Free Public License, which looks like a pretty sweet alternative to the monster that is CC0.
opensource.org
Other than Unlicense or WTFPL, it's OSI-approved.
Hunter Williams
The simplest license I've found is a GNU one. Yes, really.
This is the GNU all-permissive license:
Andrew Barnes
Nobody stealing my afro GPL
Xavier Sanchez
Damn it, I didn't see ISC on there until after I voted.
Elijah James
A superior license:
DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, December 2004Copyright (C) 2004 Sam Hocevar >Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modifiedcopies of this license document, and changing it is allowed as longas the name is changed. DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION 0. You just DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO.
Nicholas Powell
That's much longer and doesn't have the warranty part. How is it superior?
Jose Roberts
It offers much more freedom than the cucked GNU all-permissive license which states
Juan Ward
Oh boy, enjoy the lawsuits
Carson Lewis
...
Connor Stewart
The need to put such dislaimers in the code actually makes me resentful of society as a whole, and I don't release any code at all. That's the best protection, nobody can give me any shit if they don't even know I exist.
Michael Parker
Err, how about different licenses for different kinds of products and personal preference? It doesn't make sense to produce a library under the AGPL, for example. It really jut depends on what you're making and how you feel about it. A license is a personal choice of the programmer. I don't really care what it is as long as it is FOSS
Jonathan Hernandez
Why not?
Carson Turner
...
Isaiah Robinson
That's an intriguing way to get more free software.
I wonder how hard creating the next leftpad is.
Aaron Martin
WTFPL master race.
Wyatt Martin
AGPL is meant for web services. Even the FSF recommends LGPL for libraries.
Jack Johnson
Web services use libraries too.
gnu.org
Joseph Rodriguez
...
Anthony Taylor
If you can do something other people can't in academia, you make it as open and free as possible. If you can do something other people can't in business, you keep it to yourself and don't tell a single person until you're ready to sell it.
Christian Ross
Do you know what cuckolding is? It's when some guy comes along and fucks your wife while you're watching. This is what happens when you're using WTFPL; company X will come along, take your code, make it proprietary and sell it back to you, your friends or your mommy. This is what you get when you use WTFPL: Proprietary software.
Lincoln Powell
Written by a non-dev, obviously.
I have software I would release under GPL, others under LGPL, some under a "liberal" license (usually prefer MIT), others to the public domain and then proprietary software.
Most popular licenses have a purpose beyond making a statement.
Jack Thomas
If I've made my code available under a permissive license, they haven't "taken" it, I've given it.
How do they "make it proprietary"? I still have my code. It's still under a permissive license. It's still on Shithub or wherever I host it for anyone to download.
Why would I buy a license from a company for the same code I offer freely?
You're not making any sense. Please unfuck your mind and try again.
Colton Powell
voted proprietary twice
eat a fucking dick
Mason Perez
Depends on the situation at hand.
If it's a very general-purpose library or program, or otherwise something very simple (program-and-forget style stuff), BSD or MIT.
If it's a powerful library that should only be used for a very specific purpose, or a powerful program: GPL
If it's a large general-purpose library, LGPL
Proprietary only if you are required to make it proprietary (by using patent-encumbered algorithms, libraries, or company work).
Jonathan Sullivan
I don't even think it's necessary. Has anybody ever been sued because they dumped some code on the internet without an "as-is" clause and somebody else fucked up their server with it? I've never heard of something like that happening, and I'd be inclined to believe that any sane court would throw such a claim out.
Asher Nelson
My ideal license would be:
Do what you want with it so long as you acknowledge that I made this thing initially, as well as if it's edited or remixed.
I don't care about money so much as wanting to get my stuff out there.
Levi King
So pretty much BSD, ISC, or MIT license? Even CC-BY would allow for that, though you wouldn't have a warranty clause, so it wouldn't be advised.
Carson Hill
AGPL
Jacob Kelly
licenses are rulecuckery
Brandon Johnson
If you don't use one copyright law defaults to "OC, do not steal" and restricts everything it can.
Cooper Wood
So FOSS in general?