in reply to ~OT Licens(?:es)|(?:ing)

Frankly, there is nothing less interesting than licensing. It's a massive waste of time that no one should ever have to think about. I remember Tom Christiansen once advocating just putting all your code in the public domain. However, most people seem to feel the need for some kind of license, and saying "this code is available under the same license as Perl itself" is usually good enough.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: ~OT Licens(?:es)(?:ing)
by ignatz (Vicar) on Mar 22, 2002 at 17:11 UTC
    /me wonders if you can public domain away liability.
Re: Re: ~OT Licens(?:es)(?:ing)
by belg4mit (Prior) on Mar 22, 2002 at 16:25 UTC
    I wholeheartedly agree with the first half, and that's why I've avoided it for so long. Public domain is certainly an option but I think credit should go where credit is due, otherwise I believe I am attempting to effectively PD the materials. The Artistic License is a good license, I still feel it is rather bulky and cumbersome. Not hindering, just cumbersome, a lot to keep in mind and explicitly comply with, I don't take myself *that* seriously.

    --
    perl -pe "s/\b;([st])/'\1/mg"