On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 02:14:51PM -0700, Robert Ransom wrote:
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 16:45:13 -0400
Kris Maglione <maglion...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 03:29:35PM -0700, Suraj Kurapati wrote:
>On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Alexander Teinum <atei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://github.com/alexanderte/flo
>
>Congratulations on choosing the ISC license for your project. Too
>many projects still use MIT/X these days when ISC is clearly more
>suckless IMHO: because it has less LOL (lines of license ;-) Cheers.
I refuse to have anything to do with the people responsible for
BIND, ISC dhcp, and ISC ntp. They can do no right in my eyes. At
any rate, there's nothing wrong with the MIT license. It takes a
few seconds longer to read and is just as clear. Plus, it
explicitly extends its rights to the documentation and
explicitly allows for sublicensing, which ISC doesn't.
Dan Bernstein hates BIND, too. Use the DJB license: "Public domain"
Yes, hating BIND is Dan Bernstein's trademark. But "public
domain" isn't a license, and until recently his code didn't even
have that much of a license.
--
Kris Maglione
If the lessons of history teach us anything it is that nobody learns
the lessons that history teaches us.
