4 ms·
I wrote specifically "BSD-type" not BSD. We didn't use BSD license itself, as far as I can tell and the project contains surprisingly small amount of _any_ thir
by kika 13y ago
I wrote specifically "BSD-type" not BSD. We didn't use BSD license itself, as far as I can tell and the project contains surprisingly small amount of _any_ third party code.
I do not consider "poisonous license" a derogatory term. English is not my native language, may be this is why.
- belorn 13y agoThat's fair. I consider calling anything, be that GPL, BSD, or open source as poisonous as to be on the side of derogatory term, similar to the cancer comparison made by Steve Ballmer. I can see however if that’s not always the case for others. Just as a side note, I found an half year old HN article which talked about the BSD requirements, with suggest that one might want to use ISC license in some cases: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5798431 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5798431 Not that your project is code for embedded software (or is it? C code tend to be quite fast and have small memory footprint), but it might be an interesting read.
- kika 13y agoWe designed and coded it with embedded in mind. We both have extensive embedded experience and it was a no brainer with all that hype about "internet of things". Our stack is naturally born IPv6 and as such is a natural match for "things", so not thinking about embedding would have been clearly a mistake.