License about gun HOT 14 CLOSED

Honestly, I might put this up to an open-source vote.

I personally learn towards the MIT and the ZLIB license, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zlib_License .

However I also know a lot of other databases are doing AGPL, I think for monetary reasons. Which :/ I might also want to consider.

But as I said, I honestly think this should be a combination of community decision.

Could people reply back with what license they'd like?

from gun.

MIT or ZLIB would be great

from gun.

Zlib is a great choice and I'd say it's preferable

from gun.

Dual License MIT and Apache2

MIT because everyone knows what it means and believes in it.

Apache2 because it's the MIT license rewritten by an actual lawyer such that it legally provides the protection that people believe the MIT provides (because it's in English), but actually doesn't (because English !== legaleeze).

from gun.

Boom! #18

from gun.

Beep boop beep bop! #19

from gun.

You are allowed to have multiple license? How is that possible?

from gun.

E.g Dual license MIT Apache2 -> In case of fork or code reuse I could go either MIT or Apache2 as I wish ; this isn't the case for forks of forks etc. they're bound by the fork's license only.

from gun.

My project Leisure uses a ZLIB license and if you go with a commercial-friendly license like that (MIT/ZLIB/Apache/PERL), I'd love to contribute to this project!

Unfortunately, "open source" licenses with that come with strings like AGPL go against my conscience...

from gun.

Question, is it possible for a project to change license? Or once you chose it, are you stuck with it?

Also, thanks for helping me figure/understand all this stuff out. I've never paid attention to it before.

from gun.

As I understand it, the license is for a particular copy of the code. I.e. the license that came with the code is what applies to that code. So you can make different releases with different licenses but you can't retract a license from someone else's copy of your code. If I download code, the license that came with it is what applies to it.

Later on, if you issue another release under a different license, then that license is what applies to that release. Its customary to put a license notification at the top of each file to disambiguate but I suspect that a signed git version is a suitable substitute if you want to prove things.

from gun.

Okay, this really needs to get added, I'm so sorry I've been flaking on it.

Can I do a triple license? ZLIB + MIT + Apache 2? If so, could somebody do a commit with all 3 of them in 1 LICENSE file? WARNING: I've been having this issue lately where tests will fail when people edit the readme or something like that. This is bad and obviously not your fault.

from gun.

Done. #40

from gun.

@zmarouf thank you!

@dpen2000 closing!

@zot interested now in helping out!?

@coolaj86 @forrestjt beyond "dual" I got "triple" ;), closing the other related license PRs.

from gun.