I licensed runit-for-lfs under the MIT license because I wanted people to have the choice of contributing without compulsion. They can reuse the work, but we still have to be referenced only if work was derived.
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Laurent Bercot<mailto:ska-supervision_at_skarnet.org>
Sent: 10/23/2014 3:07 PM
To: supervision_at_list.skarnet.org<mailto:supervision_at_list.skarnet.org>
Subject: Re: License selection for process scripts
Licensing is only an issue if you want to distribute code together with
pre-existing licensed code. Since it's unlikely that your scripts will be
distributed together with runit, s6, daemontools, perp, or anything else,
the fact that they all have different licenses should not be a problem for
you - you don't have to worry about compatibility, you can just choose
whatever license you like best for your script packages.
As for what kind of license is "the best", it's a highly religious subject
and I very much wish to avoid this kind of debate on the mailing-list.
I've found the wikipedia article at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_and_open-source_software_licenses
as well as
http://opensource.org/licenses to be nice starting points.
--
Laurent
Received on Fri Oct 24 2014 - 06:19:05 UTC