From: Armin R. <ar...@ul...> - 2002-06-03 09:57:46
|
Hello everybody, Yet another non-technical mail... I will re-license Psyco now that it seems to begin to work usefully well, as I have mentionned some time ago that I could do. What do you think would be a good license for Psyco? I don't mind a very liberal one. Some Python-like license would be all right. I would like to take the opportunity to raise the debate as to what you think about Public Domain (or Burgoff, http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Cafe/5947/bugroff.html). Armin. |
From: Armin R. <ar...@tu...> - 2002-09-24 13:37:46
|
Hello everybody, I am about to re-license Psyco. I am considering using the MIT License for its simplicity, but one might argue that the Python License itself would be a better fit. It seems however that the latter (in either the old CNRI version or by the Python Software Foundation) is explicitely written as an agreement between the CNRI or PSF and the user, which is not the case for Psyco. Besides, the minimalistic MIT License suits me more. Any comments? A bientot, Armin. |
From: Magnus L. H. <ma...@he...> - 2002-09-24 13:59:56
|
Armin Rigo <ar...@tu...>: > > Hello everybody, > > I am about to re-license Psyco. I am considering using the MIT License > for its simplicity, but one might argue that the Python License itself > would be a better fit. It seems however that the latter (in either the > old CNRI version or by the Python Software Foundation) is explicitely > written as an agreement between the CNRI or PSF and the user, which is not > the case for Psyco. Besides, the minimalistic MIT License suits me more. > Any comments? I agree that the MIT license is very nice (simple) -- we use it in Anygui as well. > > A bientot, > > Armin. -- Magnus Lie Hetland Practical Python The Anygui Project http://hetland.org http://ppython.com http://anygui.org |
From: Michael H. <mw...@py...> - 2002-09-24 14:19:15
|
Armin Rigo <ar...@tu...> writes: > I am about to re-license Psyco. I am considering using the MIT License > for its simplicity, but one might argue that the Python License itself > would be a better fit. It seems however that the latter (in either the > old CNRI version or by the Python Software Foundation) is explicitely > written as an agreement between the CNRI or PSF and the user, which is not > the case for Psyco. Besides, the minimalistic MIT License suits me more. > Any comments? The "old" Python license -- i.e. the CWI one -- is pretty similar to the MIT License. I like it. Cheers, M. -- For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong. -- H. L. Mencken |