5 ms·
That’s the 0BSD. I called it the Free Public License when submitting to OSI, but we changed it to 0BSD because Landley had apparently come up with the same lice
by jhardy54 5y ago
That’s the 0BSD. I called it the Free Public License when submitting to OSI, but we changed it to 0BSD because Landley had apparently come up with the same license a few years before me.
- freemint 5y agoCan you post the FPL text? I am wondering whether it was literally the same license.
- jhardy54 5y agoIt’s the same text, which is just the ISC license sans the “ provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies” clause. The only differences: - I didn’t use the “Copyright Boaty McBoatface 2022” line, but that’s not a big enough change to justify having two licenses. - The license was approved as the FPL-1.0.0, which I believe was the first OSI-approved license that user semantic versioning. This isn’t necessary, but I was mildly excited about it. - The 0BSD doesn’t actually inherit from any other BSD license, the “BSD” bit is more of a spiritual nod that I found more confusing than helpful.
- freemint 5y ago> The 0BSD doesn’t actually inherit from any other BSD license, the “BSD” bit is more of a spiritual nod that I found more confusing than helpful. Don't tell Rob Landley that (the creator of the license). He is quite adamant that he used a BSD license as the basis.
- dmulholl 5y agoThanks for this. 0BSD has been my default license since I discovered it. My only issue with the MIT license was the requirement for attribution, which always seemed like an unnecessary pain. 0BSD fixes that.