4 ms·

Not all 'open source' licenses are 'non-copyleft' or 'permissive' licenses.

• zelphirkalt 6y ago
  That's why I wrote "usually" and "I might not have seen" ... Can you please _read_ what is written and consider it, before writing things, that I already know might be true?
  • e-v 6y ago
    I was simply pointing out the fact that your claim that '[u]sually "open source license" equates to MIT license and BSD licenses' is simply completely untrue. There are no 'might's or 'usually' here. Both Open Source and Free Software licenses have very clear criteria. There are no licenses which are 'usually' one or the other. They are mostly strictly equivalent.
    • zelphirkalt 6y ago
      Well then, how about you look at the next 10-20 repositories, which interest you and which are labeled "open source" and see what their licenses are? Then you will get a picture of what is "usual". You can also increase N, if you want more indication.
      • zaphar 6y ago
        In the spirit of your question I did a quick survey, Apache 2 is the winner by a landslide...