[SciPy-User] Central File Exchange for SciPy

Robert Kern robert.kern@gmail....
Mon Nov 1 21:49:20 CDT 2010


On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 21:00, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> There is a FAQ:
>
> Yes, that was the FAQ I was quoting from earlier.
>
>> """
>> Why is only one license being considered?
>> When everyone uses the same license, it is a simple matter to re-use
>> and re-license code. If more than one license is used, re-releasing
>> the code under a different license raises potential conflicts in the
>> terms of use.
>> """
>>
>> It seems more like they just wanted simplicity and consistency. Those
>> are perfectly good reasons but quite distinct from the scenarios you
>> are contemplating.
>
> I'm probably too jet-lagged to find the distinction very clear - but -
> regardless of whether I was in fact talking about simplicity and
> consistency,

You were arguing that terrible things would happen if someone
accidentally relabeled GPL code, and specifically that the viral
aspects of the GPL would damage the utility of the site. That's
different from saying that having only one license would make things
easier.

> it seems wise to take note of what the Mathworks did, on
> the basis that we  like to learn from relevant experience where
> possible.

Countervailing that is the Python Cookbook, which used to default to
the Python license and moved to an explicit, enumerated set of
licenses accompanied by a strong recommendation for the MIT license.

I think this approach is the best one. Excluding GPL snippets doesn't
buy us much more simplicity in practice and tends to exclude
contributions from the mostly-GPL Sage community and others.

-- 
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
  -- Umberto Eco


More information about the SciPy-User mailing list