Licenses: Difference between revisions

Licenses (edit)

Revision as of 21:00, 19 June 2003

9 bytes added , 19 June 2003

m

no edit summary

Jukeboksi

Bureaucrats, developer, Administrators

9,854

edits

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 * License for the actual [[Server]] and [[Client]] software isn't decided yet but it'll probably be something on the order of [[w:Apache server]] style to stop installation of [[bad copy problem|unconformant software '''pretending to be genuine''']] [[Consumerium]] software. This is very important, because the [[Retail]]ers will totally freak out if there is even an minor possibility that the [[Price]] information can leak outside the physical shop.  So there must be a [[Consumerium protocol]] that is actually implemented for this data exchange.
-* [[Sourceforge]] allows the possibility to submit your own "open source compliant" license, so if we take the Apache license, replace "Apache Software Foundation" with whatever Consumerium-entity we can come up with that holds the copyright. Unfortunatelly I still haven't gotten around to registering an association so it's a bit of a problem. Having our own license cover both [[XML]] and [[executables]] would help so that we don't have to have two (or more) separate projects, which would be a hassle. The R&D material is under [[GFDL]] so we still would able to have that positive association with all things GNU. And about the [[content]] licenses: I've been thinking that it would be quite practical to [[GFDL]] everything where it's reasonable. Having a single [[Consumerium License]] would give us the control we need over the development process and the fact that all our brainwork is [[GFDL]]'d would inhibit people from declaring that we are "control freaks", since they are free to fork away. And the license could be expalained to people by showing them the diff with the Apache license.
+* [[Sourceforge]] allows the possibility to submit your own "open source compliant" license, so if we take the Apache license, replace "Apache Software Foundation" with whatever Consumerium-entity we can come up with that holds the copyright. Unfortunatelly I still haven't gotten around to registering an association so it's a bit of a problem. Having our own license cover both [[XML]] and [[executables]] would help so that we don't have to have two (or more) separate projects, which would be a hassle. The R&D material is under [[GFDL]] so we still would able to have that positive association with all things GNU. And about the [[content]] licenses: I've been thinking that it would be quite practical to [[GFDL]] everything where it's reasonable. Having a single [[Consumerium Software License]] would give us the control we need over the development process and the fact that all our brainwork is [[GFDL]]'d would inhibit people from declaring that we are "control freaks", since they are free to fork away. And the license could be expalained to people by showing them the diff with the Apache license.
 *Further on the XSL-stylesheets that provide data-interchangeabililty between ConsuML and popular e-commerce, market data and such grammars (see:[[XML]]) could be released under [[GPL]] and [[LGPL]], so that no-one has to rewrite them to connect these different systems together