From: Tom Copeland <tom@...>
Date: 2005-08-14T01:04:33+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby report generation tool

On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 00:44 +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote:
> On 8/13/05, Greg Brown <greg7224@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Regarding Ruport, I have received some requests to consider a license
> > other than the GPL.  I am thinking of using the license of ruby
> > itself, which would be a disjunctive license of the GPL and the ruby
> > license. Would this be permissive enough for most people's needs?   I
> > am willing to consider the Artistic license as well, though I'd prefer
> > to use a license which offers the GPL as an option.  Feel free to
> > voice your opinion on or off list.
> 
> When working on PDF::Writer, I deliberately chose the MIT-style licence
> because I wanted it to be used as widely as possible. It can be used in
> GNU GPLed projects without problems (modulo issues with Adobe's patents,
> but that's a generic issue, not a GNU GPL issue) or under commercial
> projects without problems.

+1.  I BSD license my projects whenever possible - if someone wants to
use them in a product, more power to them.  More than likely, they'll be
feeding bug fixes and whatnot back into the code, and even if not, it's
more mindshare for the project.  It's worked out well for me in the Java
world with PMD - http://pmd.sf.net/ - good times.

Yours,

Tom