From: Austin Ziegler Date: 2005-08-14T01:51:38+09:00 Subject: Re: Ruby report generation tool On 8/13/05, Greg Brown wrote: > Austin Ziegler wrote: > > > Ultimately, the licence is up to you, but life is easier if you choose a > > single minimally restrictive licence rather than dual-licence. (Don't > > get me *started* on the licensing for Text::Hyphen because of jackasses > > who licenced their hyphenation files under the GNU GPL. > Okay, I'm fairly certain that I will not be releasing under just the > GPL, as it's clear that people think that it's not a great idea. Thank > you for your suggestions Austin, they were helpful. > > I am going to consider releasing under the Clarified Artistic License. > Given the choice between this and the disjunctive license of Ruby, what > are your opinions. Anyone feel free to respond on or off list. Neither the Ruby licence nor the Clarified Artistic licences are "approved" by the OSI (www.opensource.org). That said, the Ruby licence is pretty clear as to what's allowed (pretty much "anything"). I still think that your best choice is going to be BSDish or MITish, but if you go with anything else, then you'll probably need to do CAL/GPL disjunctive or the Ruby licensing option. Given that it's a Ruby package, the Ruby licence is probably okay enough. -austin -- Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com * Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca