[Pharo-project] Fwd: could you sign the pharo license?
for archive Begin forwarded message:
From: Keith Hodges <keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk> Date: December 19, 2008 5:36:26 PM CEST To: Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Subject: Re: could you sign the pharo license?
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Because I would like to have a look at some of your code and I would like to avoid making mess.
Stef All my work is licenced FRFGPL
FREELY RECEIVED FREELY GIVEN PUBLIC LICENSE Version 1, December 2006
Copyright (C) 2006 Keith Hodges
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modified copies of this license document, and changing it is allowed as long as the name is changed.
FREELY RECEIVED FREELY GIVEN PUBLIC LICENSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
0. You just DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO
this is my own derivative of the WTFPL
Keith
Really funny: http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/ "WTFPL - Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License" Alexandre On 19 Dec 2008, at 13:37, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
for archive
Begin forwarded message:
From: Keith Hodges <keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk> Date: December 19, 2008 5:36:26 PM CEST To: Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Subject: Re: could you sign the pharo license?
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Because I would like to have a look at some of your code and I would like to avoid making mess.
Stef All my work is licenced FRFGPL
FREELY RECEIVED FREELY GIVEN PUBLIC LICENSE Version 1, December 2006
Copyright (C) 2006 Keith Hodges
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modified copies of this license document, and changing it is allowed as long as the name is changed.
FREELY RECEIVED FREELY GIVEN PUBLIC LICENSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
0. You just DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO
this is my own derivative of the WTFPL
Keith
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
now the questions are - is it really that difficult to agree for a project on a given simple license such as MIT? - I also hate licenses since they polute our lives but I just don't care and signed MIT - should we accept this kind of license (of course it is compatible with MIT) but this looks a door open to the mess. I'm not sure squeakers realized that after all the effort of yohsiki to get SqueakEtoys clean 3.11 could be WTFPL because keith commit on it. I'm quite convinced that they will boycott such a code. Stef On Dec 19, 2008, at 6:20 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
Really funny:
http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/ "WTFPL - Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License"
Alexandre
On 19 Dec 2008, at 13:37, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
for archive
Begin forwarded message:
From: Keith Hodges <keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk> Date: December 19, 2008 5:36:26 PM CEST To: Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Subject: Re: could you sign the pharo license?
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Because I would like to have a look at some of your code and I would like to avoid making mess.
Stef All my work is licenced FRFGPL
FREELY RECEIVED FREELY GIVEN PUBLIC LICENSE Version 1, December 2006
Copyright (C) 2006 Keith Hodges
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modified copies of this license document, and changing it is allowed as long as the name is changed.
FREELY RECEIVED FREELY GIVEN PUBLIC LICENSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
0. You just DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO
this is my own derivative of the WTFPL
Keith
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
now the questions are - is it really that difficult to agree for a project on a given simple license such as MIT? - I also hate licenses since they polute our lives but I just don't care and signed MIT - should we accept this kind of license (of course it is compatible with MIT) but this looks a door open to the mess.
I'm not sure squeakers realized that after all the effort of yohsiki to get SqueakEtoys clean 3.11 could be WTFPL because keith commit on it.
Thats a complete load of rubbish. No. 1 I dont see any need for profanity. No. 2 my licence is not like GNU, please dont say it is because you will just confuse people. Its freer than MIT because I don't care if you take my code and sell it as your own. You can even say you wrote it if you like. The responsibility for what you do with it is yours not mine. Keith
I'm quite convinced that they will boycott such a code.
Stef
Hi Keith, Its nothing against your license (I think its cool). Its just that we initially decided that whoever contributes needs to sign the agreement. Like this, we will not have to discuss licenses over and over again. Now imagine, that every second Pharo contributor comes with his own license. Even if it is more liberal, it just adds complexity to the process and makes us discuss this topic, like we do now. I would prefer to fix a bug instead... Hence, if you could sign the "official" agreement, that would be great. Cheers, Adrian On Dec 20, 2008, at 13:09 , Keith Hodges wrote:
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
now the questions are - is it really that difficult to agree for a project on a given simple license such as MIT? - I also hate licenses since they polute our lives but I just don't care and signed MIT - should we accept this kind of license (of course it is compatible with MIT) but this looks a door open to the mess.
I'm not sure squeakers realized that after all the effort of yohsiki to get SqueakEtoys clean 3.11 could be WTFPL because keith commit on it.
Thats a complete load of rubbish.
No. 1 I dont see any need for profanity.
No. 2 my licence is not like GNU, please dont say it is because you will just confuse people.
Its freer than MIT because I don't care if you take my code and sell it as your own. You can even say you wrote it if you like. The responsibility for what you do with it is yours not mine.
Keith
I'm quite convinced that they will boycott such a code.
Stef
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
my feeling is that there should be a single license that is agreed to and signed by everyone. I hate the fact that we are discussing licenses. Given the mess that Squeak licensing got into I don't propose there is any choice on the matter. Also, the documentation on the web sites seems to be very clear on this matter. cheers, Mike On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Adrian Lienhard <adi@netstyle.ch> wrote:
Hi Keith,
Its nothing against your license (I think its cool). Its just that we initially decided that whoever contributes needs to sign the agreement. Like this, we will not have to discuss licenses over and over again. Now imagine, that every second Pharo contributor comes with his own license. Even if it is more liberal, it just adds complexity to the process and makes us discuss this topic, like we do now. I would prefer to fix a bug instead...
Hence, if you could sign the "official" agreement, that would be great.
Cheers, Adrian
On Dec 20, 2008, at 13:09 , Keith Hodges wrote:
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
now the questions are - is it really that difficult to agree for a project on a given simple license such as MIT? - I also hate licenses since they polute our lives but I just don't care and signed MIT - should we accept this kind of license (of course it is compatible with MIT) but this looks a door open to the mess.
I'm not sure squeakers realized that after all the effort of yohsiki to get SqueakEtoys clean 3.11 could be WTFPL because keith commit on it.
Thats a complete load of rubbish.
No. 1 I dont see any need for profanity.
No. 2 my licence is not like GNU, please dont say it is because you will just confuse people.
Its freer than MIT because I don't care if you take my code and sell it as your own. You can even say you wrote it if you like. The responsibility for what you do with it is yours not mine.
Keith
I'm quite convinced that they will boycott such a code.
Stef
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
I read my email the wrong way. See the answer of adrian and frankly I imagine somebody at ViewPoints collecting home made liberal licenses..... I **hate** licenses certainly much more than you and I got ***BURNED*** during years because of the license of Squeak I have folder full of crap to get Squeak presentation accepted at Linux days I hate the lawer oriented view they impose on us this is why I took mit and period. Stef On Dec 20, 2008, at 1:09 PM, Keith Hodges wrote:
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
now the questions are - is it really that difficult to agree for a project on a given simple license such as MIT? - I also hate licenses since they polute our lives but I just don't care and signed MIT - should we accept this kind of license (of course it is compatible with MIT) but this looks a door open to the mess.
I'm not sure squeakers realized that after all the effort of yohsiki to get SqueakEtoys clean 3.11 could be WTFPL because keith commit on it.
Thats a complete load of rubbish.
No. 1 I dont see any need for profanity.
No. 2 my licence is not like GNU, please dont say it is because you will just confuse people. Its freer than MIT because I don't care if you take my code and sell it as your own. You can even say you wrote it if you like. The responsibility for what you do with it is yours not mine.
Keith
I'm quite convinced that they will boycott such a code.
Stef
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
So keith could you publish your code in WTF and MIT? Note that any code publish to the squeak mantis is MIT and not WTF Stef On Dec 20, 2008, at 3:27 PM, Michael Roberts wrote:
my feeling is that there should be a single license that is agreed to and signed by everyone. I hate the fact that we are discussing licenses. Given the mess that Squeak licensing got into I don't propose there is any choice on the matter. Also, the documentation on the web sites seems to be very clear on this matter.
cheers,
Mike
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Adrian Lienhard <adi@netstyle.ch> wrote:
Hi Keith,
Its nothing against your license (I think its cool). Its just that we initially decided that whoever contributes needs to sign the agreement. Like this, we will not have to discuss licenses over and over again. Now imagine, that every second Pharo contributor comes with his own license. Even if it is more liberal, it just adds complexity to the process and makes us discuss this topic, like we do now. I would prefer to fix a bug instead...
Hence, if you could sign the "official" agreement, that would be great.
Cheers, Adrian
On Dec 20, 2008, at 13:09 , Keith Hodges wrote:
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
now the questions are - is it really that difficult to agree for a project on a given simple license such as MIT? - I also hate licenses since they polute our lives but I just don't care and signed MIT - should we accept this kind of license (of course it is compatible with MIT) but this looks a door open to the mess.
I'm not sure squeakers realized that after all the effort of yohsiki to get SqueakEtoys clean 3.11 could be WTFPL because keith commit on it.
Thats a complete load of rubbish.
No. 1 I dont see any need for profanity.
No. 2 my licence is not like GNU, please dont say it is because you will just confuse people.
Its freer than MIT because I don't care if you take my code and sell it as your own. You can even say you wrote it if you like. The responsibility for what you do with it is yours not mine.
Keith
I'm quite convinced that they will boycott such a code.
Stef
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
participants (5)
-
Adrian Lienhard -
Alexandre Bergel -
Keith Hodges -
Michael Roberts -
Stéphane Ducasse