3 ms·
The WTFPL is approved both by OSI and the FSF, both of whom had lawyers look at it. It looks like they do know what it means. I'm more of a GNU GPL guy myself,
by jordigh 11y ago
The WTFPL is approved both by OSI and the FSF, both of whom had lawyers look at it. It looks like they do know what it means.
I'm more of a GNU GPL guy myself, but the WTFPL isn't a bad license.
Edit: Ah oops, OSI did not approve WTFPL. Oh well.
- agwa 11y agoThis lawyer disagrees: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8104407 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8104407 He even points out that using it could get you sued due to the lack of a warranty disclaimer by default. I've heard other stories of companies refusing to use WTFPL-licensed code, and that alone should discourage you from using it if you goal is really to let anyone use the code with no hassle. Edit: the FSF doesn't recommend it (in contrast to CC0, which they do recommend if you want a public-domain license): http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#WTFPL http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#WTFPL
- _puk 11y agoSounds like we need a "It's not my f-ing problem" licence.
- reubenmorais 11y agoIn addition, OSI does not recommend using CC0 for software: http://opensource.org/faq#cc-zero http://opensource.org/faq#cc-zero
- agwa 11y agoThey don't approve of WTFPL either...
- reubenmorais 11y agoYou're right, I was fooled by the GP comment who said they do.