lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Am 14.08.11 12:31, schrieb Lars Doelle:
>>>> From: Lorenzo Donati<>
>>>>> -- Copyright (c) 2011 Lars Dölle<>
>>> hereby granted.
>> Anyway, to be fair, It wasn't necessary. I stand corrected, as you may
>> have read in another branch of this thread. Thus sorry for the noise.
> I might have written the same note. To explain myself, i'm working on a
> larger Lua-package which i hope to publish. Then, copyright clearly matters.
> Thus each and every source of cause contains such a note. For the posting
> of the mail-list, i retained the copyright as an originator notice, and thought,
> a license would be implicitly granted for use of discussion. If anyone would
> have used it, well, in this case i considered the snippet to be draft and short
> enought.
> Since i'm new on the list, it is good to learn, that the people here are
> copyright aware. In fact i have a copyright concern with said package
> and the yet unknown 'folklore' of the Lua-users, since Lua itself and all
> of the packages i came across are MIT-licensed.
> Now having a strong GPL background, i would not license my work under
> MIT/X11 and wonder, if this would be considered a violation of habits,
> thus making a publication partically useless. Could anyone please tell me
> if there's a common position here on this matter.

I would never even look at your code if it is GPL licensed.  I strongly
suggest you reconsider your decision.  There are many reason why Lua is
used in embedded and commercial products, and the license is one reason.

> -lars
> PS.
>> BTW, I don't know if it is just a problem of mine, since no-one else has
>> complained yet, but it seems your mail client breaks the discussion
>> thread. That is, every reply you send starts a new thread, instead of
>> following the old one (in your replies' mail headers the field
>> "in-reply-to" is missing).
>> If this is a problem on your side, consider that it is very difficult to
>> follow a thread in this way. Usually there is an option to "reply to
>> mailing list", instead of "reply to", which should set the mail headers
>> in the correct way.
> This IS really an annoyancy, sorry. I subscribed a mail digest, and my client
> does not handle this. I changed my subscription's options and it will become
> better in my later postings.