Re: Proposal: change license to ZLIB license

[Russell Haley <russ.haley@...>]

Hi, re-read my comment and the last line doesn't accurately reflect
what I was trying to say (I'm not saying the Felipe or zlib license
are pushy). I was trying to say that in my opinion the spirit of
non-copyleft  is to give free software, with more concern towards
flexibility than ownership.


Russ

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Russell Haley <russ.haley@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Felipe Ferreira <felipefsdev@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi, Paul
>>
>> The ambiguity in my concern does not refer to the different versions of the
>> MIT license, but it is about the different possible interpretations of that
>> statement (still part of the expat license). Licenses like GPL/LGPL/BSD (I'm
>> not pushing any of these, especially GPL/LGPL) has, as well, different
>> licenses, but they are all clearer in their statements.
>>
>> I *imagine* that making Lua as available as possible is on the author's
>> desires, and ZLIB fits that better than MIT.
>
> There was lots of licenses to choose from in 2002 as well. Sticking
> with recognized licenses is a good idea if you are not a lawyer. I
> prefer the FreeBSD License myself. In the spirit of non-copyleft free
> software, I personally think the more important thing is getting as
> many people as possible using your code, not telling people what to do
> with it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Russ