Re: [python-uk] copyright info in source

[Doug Winter]

  
  

  You can't just put stuff in the public domain unfortunately, it's
  all a very grey area.  
  
  Also this is very poorly drafted.
  
  If you put this statement in a file called UNLICENSE alongside
  your code then it would be pretty much meaningless in most
  jurisdictions.
  
  Cheers,
  
  Doug.
  
  On 08/10/13 07:27, Jonathan Hartley wrote:


  
  I approve of the sentiment, but it seems to me that the unlicense
  is most definitely a LICENSE. Putting legal terms and conditions,
  or waiver of same, into a differently named file, seems a step too
  far.
  
  Nevertheless, sounds cool to me, I'll read up and consider using
  it. Thanks!
  
  
  
  On 06/10/13 22:45, Harry Percival
wrote:
  
  
apologies for resurrecting a dead thread, but i
  came across this license and was impressed:
  
  http://unlicense.org/


  
   On 12 September 2013 20:08, John Lee

wrote:
 On Wed,
  11 Sep 2013, Jonathan Hartley wrote:
  [...]
  

  
I've seen it done in a special "coding style test
suite" (that gets run along with all the other
tests).  Slightly nicer than a push hook IMO because
you see it earlier and because it works the same way
as all your other automated tests of your code.
 There was a bit of special code so that you got one
failure per coding style violation I think
(including one per missing copyright statement), but
those are bonus points.

Maybe somebody has written a test runner plugin that
does that? My quick searches didn't turn one up,
though there is this, which could easily be adapted
(not a plugin, and looks like it wants to be)

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12227443/is-there-a-plugin-for-pylint-and-pyflakes-for-nose-tests


John
___
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
  
  
  
  I don't think it should be a test runner plugin, so
  much as just a test. Maybe a big common utility
  function (in a pypi package) which a tiny custom test
  function can then call to parametrize it for your
  project.


  
  That works.  The reason I suggested a plugin was so that
  plugin hooks can give the coding style check function the
  modules (and scripts) on which to operate.
  

  
  
  John
  ___
  python-uk mailing list
  python-uk@python.org
  https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk

  

  
  
  
  
  -- 
  --
  Harry J.W. Percival
  --
  Twitter: @hjwp
  Mobile:  +44 (0) 78877 02511
  Skype:         harry.percival 



___
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk

  
  
  -- 
Jonathan Hartleytart...@tartley.comhttp://tartley.com
Made of meat.   +44 7737 062 225   twitter/skype: tartley


  
  
  
  ___
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk




-- 
Telephone: +44 1904 567330, Mobile: +44 7879 423002
Switchboard: +44 1904 567349, Fax: +44 20 79006980
Post: Tower House, Fishergate, York, YO10 4UA, UK

Registered in England.  Company No 5171172.  VAT GB843570325.
Registered Address: Tower House, Fishergate, York, YO10 4UA

  

___
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk

Re: [python-uk] copyright info in source

[Ben Fields]

If you want to relinquish copyright claims and push work into the public 
domain, code or otherwise, CC0 is a much more rigorous means to do so. See 
http://creativecommons.org/choose/zero/ for detail. Intent is very similar to 
unlicense.

cheers

Ben


On Oct 8, 2013, at 9:46 AM, Doug Winter wrote:

> 
> You can't just put stuff in the public domain unfortunately, it's all a very 
> grey area.  
> 
> Also this is very poorly drafted.
> 
> If you put this statement in a file called UNLICENSE alongside your code then 
> it would be pretty much meaningless in most jurisdictions.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Doug.
> 
> On 08/10/13 07:27, Jonathan Hartley wrote:
>> I approve of the sentiment, but it seems to me that the unlicense is most 
>> definitely a LICENSE. Putting legal terms and conditions, or waiver of same, 
>> into a differently named file, seems a step too far.
>> 
>> Nevertheless, sounds cool to me, I'll read up and consider using it. Thanks!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 06/10/13 22:45, Harry Percival wrote:
>>> apologies for resurrecting a dead thread, but i came across this license 
>>> and was impressed:
>>> 
>>> http://unlicense.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 12 September 2013 20:08, John Lee  wrote:
>>> On Wed, 11 Sep 2013, Jonathan Hartley wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> 
>>> I've seen it done in a special "coding style test suite" (that gets run 
>>> along with all the other tests).  Slightly nicer than a push hook IMO 
>>> because you see it earlier and because it works the same way as all your 
>>> other automated tests of your code.  There was a bit of special code so 
>>> that you got one failure per coding style violation I think (including one 
>>> per missing copyright statement), but those are bonus points.
>>> 
>>> Maybe somebody has written a test runner plugin that does that? My quick 
>>> searches didn't turn one up, though there is this, which could easily be 
>>> adapted (not a plugin, and looks like it wants to be)
>>> 
>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12227443/is-there-a-plugin-for-pylint-and-pyflakes-for-nose-tests
>>>  
>>> 
>>> John
>>> ___
>>> python-uk mailing list
>>> python-uk@python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I don't think it should be a test runner plugin, so much as just a test. 
>>> Maybe a big common utility function (in a pypi package) which a tiny custom 
>>> test function can then call to parametrize it for your project.
>>> 
>>> That works.  The reason I suggested a plugin was so that plugin hooks can 
>>> give the coding style check function the modules (and scripts) on which to 
>>> operate.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> John
>>> ___
>>> python-uk mailing list
>>> python-uk@python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> --
>>> Harry J.W. Percival
>>> --
>>> Twitter: @hjwp
>>> Mobile:  +44 (0) 78877 02511
>>> Skype: harry.percival
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> python-uk mailing list
>>> python-uk@python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jonathan Hartleytart...@tartley.comhttp://tartley.com
>> Made of meat.   +44 7737 062 225   twitter/skype: tartley
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> python-uk mailing list
>> python-uk@python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
> 
> 
> -- 
> Telephone: +44 1904 567330, Mobile: +44 7879 423002
> Switchboard: +44 1904 567349, Fax: +44 20 79006980
> Post: Tower House, Fishergate, York, YO10 4UA, UK
> 
> Registered in England.  Company No 5171172.  VAT GB843570325.
> Registered Address: Tower House, Fishergate, York, YO10 4UA
> ___
> python-uk mailing list
> python-uk@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk

--
Benjamin Fields

Wandering Scholar
e   : m...@benfields.net
m   : +44 (0)796 106 1568
t   : @alsothings
w : http://benfields.net

"Which is more musical: a truck passing by a factory or a truck passing by a 
music school?" --John Cage
--
As part of my participation in the Ride London 100 I’m raising money for the 
London Cycling Campaign. Please sponsor me at 
http://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/BenFields  Thanks!



___
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk

Re: [python-uk] copyright info in source

[Jon Ribbens]

On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 10:45:20PM +0100, Harry Percival wrote:
>apologies for resurrecting a dead thread, but i came across this license
>and was impressed:
> 
>http://unlicense.org/

It seems to me that it's similar to the MIT License except without the
benefit of having been written by someone who has the slightest clue
about copyright law. As far as I'm aware you cannot just "put something
in the public domain", and therefore without a proper license you have
no right to use code written by anyone else.
___
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk