removal of non-standard licenses in Octave Forge

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

removal of non-standard licenses in Octave Forge

Carnë Draug-2
Hi everyone

we have a couple of files in Octave Forge with non-standard licenses.
This is bad. Being able to give it a recognisable name not only eases
our organisation but also its acceptance by downstream package
maintainers such as Debian. From Debian's upstream guide "Please do
not write your own license text if you can at all avoid it. Depending
on your wishes, the GPL, LGPL or a BSD-style license will most likely
be appropriate, and it is far easier to tell whether something is
allowed if we can look at past discussions of the same text. "

I believe that in most cases such user-made licenses are not made
because there's no appropriate license out there, but out of
indifference for the subject and belief on others better part. For
example, some functions in the image package have the following
license "This code has no warrany whatsoever. Do what you like with
this code as long as you leave this copyright in place" which could
easily be replaced by something such as the simplified BSD, FreeBSD or
ICS license which I have already suggested to the original author.

I'd like to propose that we no longer accept such non-standard
licenses and propose this list
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses as
the ones that are acceptable. Does anyone oppose to such change?

Carnë

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WINDOWS 8 is here.
Millions of people.  Your app in 30 days.
Visit The Windows 8 Center at Sourceforge for all your go to resources.
http://windows8center.sourceforge.net/
join-generation-app-and-make-money-coding-fast/
_______________________________________________
Octave-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: removal of non-standard licenses in Octave Forge

Juan Pablo Carbajal-2
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Carnë Draug <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi everyone
>
> we have a couple of files in Octave Forge with non-standard licenses.
> This is bad. Being able to give it a recognisable name not only eases
> our organisation but also its acceptance by downstream package
> maintainers such as Debian. From Debian's upstream guide "Please do
> not write your own license text if you can at all avoid it. Depending
> on your wishes, the GPL, LGPL or a BSD-style license will most likely
> be appropriate, and it is far easier to tell whether something is
> allowed if we can look at past discussions of the same text. "
>
> I believe that in most cases such user-made licenses are not made
> because there's no appropriate license out there, but out of
> indifference for the subject and belief on others better part. For
> example, some functions in the image package have the following
> license "This code has no warrany whatsoever. Do what you like with
> this code as long as you leave this copyright in place" which could
> easily be replaced by something such as the simplified BSD, FreeBSD or
> ICS license which I have already suggested to the original author.
>
> I'd like to propose that we no longer accept such non-standard
> licenses and propose this list
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses as
> the ones that are acceptable. Does anyone oppose to such change?
>
> Carnë
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WINDOWS 8 is here.
> Millions of people.  Your app in 30 days.
> Visit The Windows 8 Center at Sourceforge for all your go to resources.
> http://windows8center.sourceforge.net/
> join-generation-app-and-make-money-coding-fast/
> _______________________________________________
> Octave-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev

I subscribe to the initiative.

We could also provide this table (which is far more easy to read)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_FSF-approved_software_licenses

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WINDOWS 8 is here.
Millions of people.  Your app in 30 days.
Visit The Windows 8 Center at Sourceforge for all your go to resources.
http://windows8center.sourceforge.net/
join-generation-app-and-make-money-coding-fast/
_______________________________________________
Octave-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: removal of non-standard licenses in Octave Forge

Carnë Draug-2
In reply to this post by Carnë Draug-2
On 28 October 2012 19:13, Carnë Draug <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi everyone
>
> we have a couple of files in Octave Forge with non-standard licenses.
> This is bad. Being able to give it a recognisable name not only eases
> our organisation but also its acceptance by downstream package
> maintainers such as Debian. From Debian's upstream guide "Please do
> not write your own license text if you can at all avoid it. Depending
> on your wishes, the GPL, LGPL or a BSD-style license will most likely
> be appropriate, and it is far easier to tell whether something is
> allowed if we can look at past discussions of the same text. "
>
> I believe that in most cases such user-made licenses are not made
> because there's no appropriate license out there, but out of
> indifference for the subject and belief on others better part. For
> example, some functions in the image package have the following
> license "This code has no warrany whatsoever. Do what you like with
> this code as long as you leave this copyright in place" which could
> easily be replaced by something such as the simplified BSD, FreeBSD or
> ICS license which I have already suggested to the original author.
>
> I'd like to propose that we no longer accept such non-standard
> licenses and propose this list
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses as
> the ones that are acceptable. Does anyone oppose to such change?
>
> Carnë

After 1 week there has been no opposition.

>From now on, only code under a license listed on
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
will be released through Octave Forge.

Carnë

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LogMeIn Central: Instant, anywhere, Remote PC access and management.
Stay in control, update software, and manage PCs from one command center
Diagnose problems and improve visibility into emerging IT issues
Automate, monitor and manage. Do more in less time with Central
http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein12331_d2d
_______________________________________________
Octave-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: removal of non-standard licenses in Octave Forge

Juan Pablo Carbajal-2
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Carnë Draug <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 28 October 2012 19:13, Carnë Draug <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi everyone
>>
>> we have a couple of files in Octave Forge with non-standard licenses.
>> This is bad. Being able to give it a recognisable name not only eases
>> our organisation but also its acceptance by downstream package
>> maintainers such as Debian. From Debian's upstream guide "Please do
>> not write your own license text if you can at all avoid it. Depending
>> on your wishes, the GPL, LGPL or a BSD-style license will most likely
>> be appropriate, and it is far easier to tell whether something is
>> allowed if we can look at past discussions of the same text. "
>>
>> I believe that in most cases such user-made licenses are not made
>> because there's no appropriate license out there, but out of
>> indifference for the subject and belief on others better part. For
>> example, some functions in the image package have the following
>> license "This code has no warrany whatsoever. Do what you like with
>> this code as long as you leave this copyright in place" which could
>> easily be replaced by something such as the simplified BSD, FreeBSD or
>> ICS license which I have already suggested to the original author.
>>
>> I'd like to propose that we no longer accept such non-standard
>> licenses and propose this list
>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses as
>> the ones that are acceptable. Does anyone oppose to such change?
>>
>> Carnë
>
> After 1 week there has been no opposition.
>
> >From now on, only code under a license listed on
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
> will be released through Octave Forge.
>
> Carnë
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> LogMeIn Central: Instant, anywhere, Remote PC access and management.
> Stay in control, update software, and manage PCs from one command center
> Diagnose problems and improve visibility into emerging IT issues
> Automate, monitor and manage. Do more in less time with Central
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein12331_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Octave-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev

Thank you Carnë

Some people may find this table easier to read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_FSF-approved_software_licenses

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LogMeIn Central: Instant, anywhere, Remote PC access and management.
Stay in control, update software, and manage PCs from one command center
Diagnose problems and improve visibility into emerging IT issues
Automate, monitor and manage. Do more in less time with Central
http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein12331_d2d
_______________________________________________
Octave-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev