What's a good license for My Library?
in [JavaScript]
|
From: David Mark on 5 Jan 2010 17:57 Garrett Smith wrote: > David Mark wrote: >> I've decided to release My Library under some sort of free license. >> Haven't thought about free licenses in a long time (decades), so I am >> open to ideas. >> > > Why not use Dojo? For what? > >> Anything to prevent the exponential growth of JS futility like this;- >> >> http://github.com/jrburke/blade >> > > He's got some goals there. Didn't peek at the code. The code is the usual gibberish. As for the "goals":- * Smallest possible namespace Meaningless. Generalizations don't work as design goals. * Use a standalone module loader, runjs That thing is complete garbage. * object.verb(�) or verb(object,�) Whatever. * Modules should define a function Meaningless. * Mobile is more important than Internet Explorer Apples are more important than oranges? :) * HTML5 support is standard Except that he never figured out the current (or past) technologies. ;) * Use advanced features where possible :) See most of the above. * JQuery API matching Not a good goal to match an awkward and ill-advised API like jQuery's. And yes, despite there being very little code at all at this point, a large percentage of it involves the rookie mistake of "overloading." * Focus on the code, not the tooling LOL. Learn the language first, yes? * Provide BSD licensed, CLA-safe code CLA-safe?
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 5 Jan 2010 18:21 David Mark wrote: > | * Provide BSD licensed, CLA-safe code > > CLA-safe? Probably he is referring to <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributor_License_Agreement> PointedEars -- Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript. -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f806at$ail$1$8300dec7(a)news.demon.co.uk>
From: David Mark on 5 Jan 2010 19:51 On Jan 5, 5:06 pm, Scott Sauyet <scott.sau...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 4, 7:38 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > I've decided to release My Library under some sort of free license. > > Haven't thought about free licenses in a long time (decades), so I am > > open to ideas. > > Well, I guess it depends upon what you mean by free license. Meaning that commercial enterprises can use it to avoid having to swap out piles of manure like jQuery every six months. It's always been free for non-commercial use. ISTM that decision-makers at corporations wouldn't care if a library is free or not (provided it isn't outrageously priced), but they defer to Web monkeys on such decisions (and those types are obsessed with getting everything for free). So that would seem to be a barrier and I am taking it down. > > What do you want to allow users to do with the code? Whatever they want. > > - View it? We all know that they will anyway. They _have_ anyway. That's certainly no secret. ;) > > - Steal^H^H^H^H^H Borrow heavily from it? Ditto. Same. I've allowed it to go on as I have better things to do than file lawsuits. > > - Modify it and release incompatible versions of it? Most FOSS > licenses allow this, and the major discriminator between them is > whether they require the modified versions to maintain the same > license. No, I don't want a hundred "forks" to start springing up. > > - Do whatever the hell they want with it as long as they don't > bother or blame you? Most of the BSD or MIT style licenses are pretty > good for this. Typically users of my code rely on me for support and/or other consulting. The more the merrier. :) > > Matt's suggestion is a good one if you really don't care too much > about how they use it as long as they don't try to blame you for > problems or credit you for their distortions of your code. MIT / GPL > covers the spectrum comfortably. I'm looking into it...
From: Jorge on 5 Jan 2010 20:10 On Jan 5, 1:38 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I've decided to release My Library under some sort of free license. > Haven't thought about free licenses in a long time (decades), so I am > open to ideas. "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil" ? -- Jorge.
From: David Mark on 5 Jan 2010 20:15
On Jan 5, 8:10 pm, Jorge <jo...(a)jorgechamorro.com> wrote: > On Jan 5, 1:38 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > I've decided to release My Library under some sort of free license. > > Haven't thought about free licenses in a long time (decades), so I am > > open to ideas. > > "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil" ? Well, as the "competitors" are virtually all "Evil" (i.e. full of hacks, outdated ideas, bogus logic, misconceptions, etc.), using My Library can only be considered "Good" by comparison. |