Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wayland's MIT License To Be Updated/Corrected

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wayland's MIT License To Be Updated/Corrected

    Phoronix: Wayland's MIT License To Be Updated/Corrected

    Following the recent confusion over Wayland's actual license and the license text within the code not technically being correct, that text will be updated...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nse-MIT-Update

  • #2
    Well, if someone needs a laconic and permissive license to start a project without confusion, the ISC license is a very good choice, there is no questions like ?how many clauses your BSD License have?? or ?is your MIT license is the Expat one??…?
    Last edited by illwieckz; 11 June 2015, 02:03 PM. Reason: vBulletin is doing something wrong with unicode characters

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by illwieckz View Post
      Well, if someone needs a laconic and permissive license to start a project without confusion, the ISC license is a very good choice, there is no questions like ?how many clauses your BSD License have?? or ?is your MIT license is the Expat one??……
      Yeah, let's use a new license!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by illwieckz View Post
        Well, if someone needs a laconic and permissive license to start a project without confusion, the ISC license is a very good choice, there is no questions like ?how many clauses your BSD License have?? or ?is your MIT license is the Expat one????
        https://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ISC

        This license is sometimes also known as the OpenBSD License. It is a lax, permissive free software license, and compatible with the GNU GPL.
        This license does have an unfortunate wording choice: it provides recipients with "Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software…" This is roughly the same language from the license of Pine that the University of Washington later claimed prohibited people from distributing modified versions of the software.
        ISC has told us they do not share the University of Washington's interpretation, and we have every reason to believe them. Thus, there's no reason to avoid software released under this license. However, to help make sure this language cannot cause any trouble in the future, we encourage developers to choose a different license for their own works. The Expat License and FreeBSD License are similarly permissive and brief.
        TL;DR: avoid the ISC license, its additional shortness is not worth it. Use the Expat license instead, which is very common now.

        Comment


        • #5
          Or just the Boost license: http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Boost1.0

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Jristz
            is X11 code the one that have the licence wrong?
            X11's licensing evolved several times over the decades.

            Comment


            • #7
              BTW the regular MIT license was successfully committed.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Calinou View Post

                TL;DR: avoid the ISC license, its additional shortness is not worth it. Use the Expat license instead, which is very common now.
                I think the claim was that international law has evolved so that anything more would be unnecessary. You don't need to say in license illegal things are forbidden

                Comment

                Working...
                X