3 ms·
Oh no that won't fly at all. People around here really like "proper" licenses. And they'll tell you about it.
by nicky0 2y ago
Oh no that won't fly at all. People around here really like "proper" licenses. And they'll tell you about it.
- actionfromafar 2y agoI don't like the (perhaps actually a) license, because it set's limits on what the user can do with the source code. (Not allowing Objective C in it.)
- fao_ 2y agoyeah i accidentally added objective c code and now im kissing my ass bracing for the lawsuit!!!!!!!111
- gleenn 2y agoI'm not a lawyer but one would definitely let you know that at least in the US, software without a license is more dangerous than software with even a very restrictive one. Someone can come along and determine the license at any time. So there is good reason to point it out unless you crave legal jeopardy.
- nicky0 2y agoGNU/FSF's opinion on informal licenses (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#informal https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#informal): Informal license An “informal license” means a statement such as “do whatever you like with this” or “you can redistribute this code and change it.” In the United States, these licenses are supposed to be interpreted based on what the author seems to intend. So they probably mean what they appear to mean. That would make them non-copyleft free software licenses and compatible with the GNU GPL. However, an unlucky choice of wording could give it a different meaning. However, many other countries have a more rigid approach to copyright licenses. There is no telling what courts in those countries might decide an informal statement means. Courts might even decide that it is not a license at all. If you want your code to be free, don't invite gratuitous trouble for your users. Please choose and apply an established free software license. We offer recommendations that we suggest you follow.