PG: Arc Likely To Be Open-Sourced This Winter

Re:PG: Arc Likely To Be Open-Sourced This Winter by coffeeaddicted on Monday January 14, 2008 @10:25PM (#98498)

I prefer zlib or boost licenses which make a distinction for binaries. You don't have to attach the license for binary-only applications which makes it more suited in some cases (like embedded development).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:PG: Arc Likely To Be Open-Sourced This Winter by viergroupie on Tuesday January 15, 2008 @02:46PM (#98791)

I second zlib. It's slightly more restrictive than MIT, but in a very sensible way. I don't think preventing modified sources from masquerading as the original Arc, or maintaining author attribution will impede adoption overly much.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:PG: Arc Likely To Be Open-Sourced This Winter by ericb on Tuesday January 15, 2008 @10:40PM (#99051)

Pardon my naivete, but are masquerading languages a common problem?

Choosing a license to fight imagined evils seems like the short route to a DRM'd license.

[ Parent | on HN ]