| 1 |
Beside being off-topic. And beside SCIM being a well-known opensource |
| 2 |
projector for IME. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
If you're inventing a new license, that's simply wrong. |
| 5 |
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes |
| 6 |
flameeyes@×××××××××.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
On 3 November 2014 13:24, Andrés Martinelli <andmarti@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 10 |
> Hello there. Thanks for your time and taking a look at the app. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> About the license, my idea was to start scim with its own license, and keep |
| 13 |
> it as simple as could be, but keeping in line with the points mentioned in |
| 14 |
> it. |
| 15 |
> I believe it will always suit best something particular and written for it, |
| 16 |
> than something more general, but take in mind that this license can suffer |
| 17 |
> modifications since this project is just starting! Since SCIM can be |
| 18 |
> modified and redistributed with other license, such as any other GPL |
| 19 |
> compatible, I believe is not as restrictive as it seems. |
| 20 |
> Please, I am interested in hearing what points you dislike or consider are |
| 21 |
> restrictive. |
| 22 |
> Thanks! |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> 2014-11-03 9:01 GMT-03:00 Matthias Maier <tamiko@g.o>: |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>> Am 03. Nov 2014, 00:24 schrieb Andrés Martinelli <andmarti@×××××.com>: |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> > I am working on a terminal spreadsheet based on "sc", but with some |
| 30 |
>> > adds like undo/redo.. |
| 31 |
>> > you can find it here: |
| 32 |
>> > |
| 33 |
>> > https://github.com/andmarti1424/scim |
| 34 |
>> > |
| 35 |
>> > Any new ideas and/or contribution is always welcome! |
| 36 |
>> |
| 37 |
>> Just out of curiosity. |
| 38 |
>> |
| 39 |
>> The original sc program is public domain [1]. |
| 40 |
>> |
| 41 |
>> You have chosen to relicense your fork of the codebase under a custom |
| 42 |
>> license that you labeled "SCIM license". |
| 43 |
>> |
| 44 |
>> A quick peek at the license [2] reveals quite a cumbersome number of |
| 45 |
>> issues (forced contact, contact possibility, redistribution in form of |
| 46 |
>> tarballs and patches). Such a license usually prevents any meaningful |
| 47 |
>> number of external contributions and packaging. Not to mention that |
| 48 |
>> layman's licenses are almost always fundamentally flawed. |
| 49 |
>> |
| 50 |
>> Why not using an FSF-approved, OSI-approved, and/or DFSG compatible |
| 51 |
>> license instead? I'm sure that there is something available that fits |
| 52 |
>> your taste. (You can e.g. license under "GPL 2 or later" and ask for a |
| 53 |
>> special (non binding) courtesy to inform you of changes/patches.) |
| 54 |
>> |
| 55 |
>> Best, |
| 56 |
>> Matthias |
| 57 |
>> |
| 58 |
>> [1] |
| 59 |
>> http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/s/sc/sc_7.16-3_copyright |
| 60 |
>> [2] https://github.com/andmarti1424/scim/blob/master/LICENSE |
| 61 |
>> |
| 62 |
> |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> |
| 65 |
> -- |
| 66 |
> Andrés Martinelli |
Archives