Re: [OctDev] removal of non-standard licenses in Octave Forge

[Juan P. C. <aju...@gm...>]

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Carnë Draug <car...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi everyone
>
> we have a couple of files in Octave Forge with non-standard licenses.
> This is bad. Being able to give it a recognisable name not only eases
> our organisation but also its acceptance by downstream package
> maintainers such as Debian. From Debian's upstream guide "Please do
> not write your own license text if you can at all avoid it. Depending
> on your wishes, the GPL, LGPL or a BSD-style license will most likely
> be appropriate, and it is far easier to tell whether something is
> allowed if we can look at past discussions of the same text. "
>
> I believe that in most cases such user-made licenses are not made
> because there's no appropriate license out there, but out of
> indifference for the subject and belief on others better part. For
> example, some functions in the image package have the following
> license "This code has no warrany whatsoever. Do what you like with
> this code as long as you leave this copyright in place" which could
> easily be replaced by something such as the simplified BSD, FreeBSD or
> ICS license which I have already suggested to the original author.
>
> I'd like to propose that we no longer accept such non-standard
> licenses and propose this list
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses as
> the ones that are acceptable. Does anyone oppose to such change?
>
> Carnë
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WINDOWS 8 is here.
> Millions of people.  Your app in 30 days.
> Visit The Windows 8 Center at Sourceforge for all your go to resources.
> http://windows8center.sourceforge.net/
> join-generation-app-and-make-money-coding-fast/
> _______________________________________________
> Octave-dev mailing list
> Oct...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev

I subscribe to the initiative.

We could also provide this table (which is far more easy to read)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_FSF-approved_software_licenses