3 ms·
Not that github should be the only location of open source, but does anybody else find themselves surprised when they come across code samples that don't use it
by zacharypinter 17y ago
Not that github should be the only location of open source, but does anybody else find themselves surprised when they come across code samples that don't use it?
- teej 17y agoI was surprised when I saw a link to a tgz file. I almost put it into a Github repo, but the code didn't come with a license.
- jcollins 17y agoGood point about the license. Consider it public domain. I'll make a note about it on the blog entry. I'll slap it up on github in a few and update the links. http://github.com/beetlebugorg/PictureMe/tree/master http://github.com/beetlebugorg/PictureMe/tree/master
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- e1ven 17y agoNot for nothing, I think it might be best to give it an explicit license. I would suggest the MIT license ( http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php ) if you want to be public-domain-esque. It turns out that just advising to consider it public domain doesn't carry much legal standing, neither in protecting you, nor in ensuring people can get it past their laywers.
- jcollins 17y agoThat's probably a good place for it. I guess I felt like posting it to github would be turning it into a "project", which definitely isn't the goal but I suppose I could just dump code there for the taking. Other folks do it. =\
- ankhmoop 17y agoMost github links appear to be code dumps, not projects (or, at least, what I would consider projects). My definition of a 'project' includes documentation, stable releases (ie, tar/zip archives), issue tracking, mailing lists -- these things seem to be perennially missing from most github projects I encounter.
- thorax 17y agoI tend to see just as many using code.google.com/p.