Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

mTCP 2010-10-20 Version - IP Fragments! (Announce)

posted by ecm Homepage E-mail, Düsseldorf, Germany, 22.10.2010, 21:59

> I have not picked a specific license for it but I suspect it will be
> something GPL like.
In this case, please look into using the GPL v2+, v3+ or a license that allows GPL re-licensing. Copyleft (the requirement to keep the same license for derivative works) incompatible to the GPL's is a real obstacle.

LGPL (or whatever the GPLv3 equivalent is called) and maybe an even more explicit linking exception (see FSF website) would certainly aid your goals by allowing anyone to link to (ie. use) your network stack no matter their licensing.

> I did this as a hobby to support other hobbyists so I
> really don't want to see it as the underpinnings of a commercial product,
> no matter how unlikely that is. That makes a BSD style license less
> likely.
I want to give any users freedom; and when I say "any" I do literally mean "any" - including those developing software with more restrictive licenses (such as non-free or GPL software). It is unlikely someone will actually sell your program with little or no modification.

More likely would be someone using your code in building the network stack for their non-free application - but I consider that a good thing. Note that per the BSD licenses, any application build using your code would have to reproduce your copyright notices in its documentation. I think the alternatives in this case are these: either they would have coded their own network stack (probably inferior to yours), or used another one (maybe inferior), or they would not have been able to develop their application at all (even if not free, I consider that a loss), or they would incorporate your GPLed code and release their software under the GPL too. The LGPL and/or a linking exception allows users to use your code in some more cases, but isn't always sufficient.

I think you can tell my suggestion is a "BSD-style" license - specifically, I prefer the 2-clause BSD license (or "Simplified BSD license"). Some of my stuff is available in the public domain too.

I would regret a GPL release of your code, but be assured I would welcome it at the same time. Because GPL code is better than no code.

> The problem with any open source license (or any license in general) is
> enforcement. I don't have the resources to do anything if somebody doesn't
> want to play fair. I guess that is a problem we all face.
First off, I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
It appears that you can ask the FSF for help in such cases, even if you did not assign the copyright of your programs to the FSF. You're apparently free to do the latter, in which case they can do the enforcement entirely on their own if necessary. I don't know whether they would help you with enforcement of free non-GPL licenses but you're certainly free to e-mail them about that, or try reading it out of their FAQs.

> Of a more practical concern is having a real source code repository and
> being able to keep up with changes that people might want to see. I'm
> fairly particular about my code so I'm worried about people becoming
> frustrated and just not sending me patches because I'm too slow or I
> scrutinize the code too much. :-(
I wouldn't worry about that. If it's about the hosting, make it a project on SourceForge. You have no obligation to keep up with people's request. If anyone were to get that frustrated with your code review practices, they'd probably create a fork. I don't think any of these will prove real difficulties to you.

---
l

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22781 Postings in 2123 Threads, 402 registered users (0 online)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum