18 ms·

WTFPL and other similar licenses seem to belong with the MIT license, but they're just floating off on their own.

• sudont 16y ago
  Agreed. Flowcharts also assume that there is some sort of decision hierarchy that will be followed. Who's to say that derivative works are the most important thing here? Maybe some company/person needs to cover their ass in another way first. This list is less a description and more a taxonomy, which means that it's not valuable to anyone new to these licenses. When starting a project, it's best to convey the benefits of each license in a straightforward manner to whoever the decision maker is. A tree like this will only confuse and ensure that an ill-fitting license is chosen from the onset. Simple, written definitions are therefore best, and are similar to the article here: http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL
  • scythe 16y ago
    This would matter if there were more than 12 licenses. As it stands, it takes less than a minute to look at every possibility on the chart.
    • beza1e1 16y ago
      Well, the chart does not include much. For example, i found the ISC licence now. It seems to be equivalent to MIT, but has simpler text. http://www.isc.org/software/license http://www.isc.org/software/license