On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:00:10 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > > [...] >> I've never used the program, though, so I have no idea how good it is. >> All I've done is download the tar.gz and glance over a few bits (the >> licence, mainly - which is mostly-GPL). > > "Mostly" GPL? You mean "not GPL". > > I really wish people wouldn't invent their own licences. It adds > complexity and confusion to the licencing space. Unless you're a lawyer, > and sometimes even if you are a lawyer, any modification you make to an > established licence could be invalid, or possibly even invalidate the > entire licence. > > Licence proliferation hurts us all. Just say No. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License_proliferation
The wording in the file does permit you to use it under the exact terms of the GPL (though no version is specified). But I agree, we should stick to a handful of well-known licenses and be done with it. I like the BSD two-clause, myself, less wordy than the GPL. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
