4 ms·

> At present there is no license and to my knowledge it is very restrictive. This will change. I have not made up my mind on the exact license. There might be

> At present there is no license and to my knowledge it is very restrictive. This will change. I have not made up my mind on the exact license. There might be something lost in translation but since there is no licence this is a copyrighted work and cannot be used without permission.

raro11 4y ago
You are correct
metadat 4y ago
- devnull3 4y ago
  > is it some kind of a tease (I am the author). It's definitely not a tease. The license will change within a week (max 2). This is my first open source project. The purpose is to validate the approach. This has been a private project for a very long time. It can be argued that I should have figured out the license but the delay from my side reached a tipping point. I just thought "make it public, figure the rest later".
  - GoOnThenDoTell 4y ago
    Should we avoid even reading this code if there is no license? Its currently proprietary code?
    - devnull3 4y ago
      I think you can read the code. I knowingly made the repo public. You do not even have to login to github. I think it should be ok.
      - dkjaudyeqooe 4y ago
        It's just a matter of legalities. Even if you share it openly, it doesn't change its copyright status. Unless you offer a licence or make a statement putting it in the public domain (this doesn't work in all jurisdictions), it remains proprietary. Of course that doesn't matter too much because you're not going to sue people who use it, but it can still have potentially significant consequences for people who use the code.
  - metadat 4y ago
    Got it, if you're open to feedback: in the future, a few more words of explanation about the reasoning in the readme will be appreciated by folks and go a long way in making it clear you are reasonable and thoughtful person. Otherwise it's up to the reader to guess what kind of individual sits on the other side of the screen. Unfortunately there is a lot of code license drama these days compared to a decade ago. For reference, see the Elasticsearch OSS License renege fiasco from January 2021. https://www.infoq.com/news/2021/01/elastic-aws-open-source/ https://www.infoq.com/news/2021/01/elastic-aws-open-source/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elasticsearch#Licensing_changes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elasticsearch#Licensing_change... Keep up the good work!
    - devnull3 4y ago
      Noted. I have changed the license to MIT.
    - kevinmgranger 4y ago
      Isn't "...and to my knowledge it is very restrictive. This will change." enough of an explanation?
devnull3 4y ago
I have changed the license to MIT. Sorry for the wrong impression.
squeaky-clean 4y ago
That's exactly how I read that sentence. There was no license, and ironically no license is more restrictive than most licenses. Once you release code under a certain license you can pretty much never undo that. You can change the license, but the previous version under the previous license will still be valid. So I understand wanting to take time to think about what license you will use.
- wruza 4y ago
  Why ironically? License (aka permit) is a document which gives someone a set of rights. No license no permission, that’s by default.
  - hot_gril 4y ago
    It's ironic because usually when there's no license, it's cause the author doesn't care what you do with the code. Anyone who actually cares will say "proprietary" or whatever.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

raro11 4y ago

You are correct

metadat 4y ago

devnull3 4y ago
> is it some kind of a tease (I am the author). It's definitely not a tease. The license will change within a week (max 2). This is my first open source project. The purpose is to validate the approach. This has been a private project for a very long time. It can be argued that I should have figured out the license but the delay from my side reached a tipping point. I just thought "make it public, figure the rest later".
- GoOnThenDoTell 4y ago
  Should we avoid even reading this code if there is no license? Its currently proprietary code?
  - devnull3 4y ago
    I think you can read the code. I knowingly made the repo public. You do not even have to login to github. I think it should be ok.
    - dkjaudyeqooe 4y ago
      It's just a matter of legalities. Even if you share it openly, it doesn't change its copyright status. Unless you offer a licence or make a statement putting it in the public domain (this doesn't work in all jurisdictions), it remains proprietary. Of course that doesn't matter too much because you're not going to sue people who use it, but it can still have potentially significant consequences for people who use the code.
- metadat 4y ago
  Got it, if you're open to feedback: in the future, a few more words of explanation about the reasoning in the readme will be appreciated by folks and go a long way in making it clear you are reasonable and thoughtful person. Otherwise it's up to the reader to guess what kind of individual sits on the other side of the screen. Unfortunately there is a lot of code license drama these days compared to a decade ago. For reference, see the Elasticsearch OSS License renege fiasco from January 2021. https://www.infoq.com/news/2021/01/elastic-aws-open-source/ https://www.infoq.com/news/2021/01/elastic-aws-open-source/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elasticsearch#Licensing_changes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elasticsearch#Licensing_change... Keep up the good work!
  - devnull3 4y ago
    Noted. I have changed the license to MIT.
  - kevinmgranger 4y ago
    Isn't "...and to my knowledge it is very restrictive. This will change." enough of an explanation?

devnull3 4y ago

I have changed the license to MIT. Sorry for the wrong impression.

squeaky-clean 4y ago

That's exactly how I read that sentence. There was no license, and ironically no license is more restrictive than most licenses. Once you release code under a certain license you can pretty much never undo that. You can change the license, but the previous version under the previous license will still be valid. So I understand wanting to take time to think about what license you will use.

wruza 4y ago
Why ironically? License (aka permit) is a document which gives someone a set of rights. No license no permission, that’s by default.
- hot_gril 4y ago
  It's ironic because usually when there's no license, it's cause the author doesn't care what you do with the code. Anyone who actually cares will say "proprietary" or whatever.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]