开源许可证问题 [英] Open Source License Question
问题描述
我想稍微正式化我发布项目的许可证
下。目前，它可以免费使用，修改，分发和支付
relicense''。这基本上很好，因为我不想在商业环境中使用我的工作来预防人们使用我的工作 - 但是我想保留
权利被确定为作者。我也想阻止人们销售衍生作品，而我的东西构成了产品的重要部分。
我更愿意使用OSI批准的许可证 - 但这不是必需的。
我一直在浏览它们，我不能完全看到它>
*完全符合该法案。在我自己选择之前，我想知道是否有人给b
有一个推荐。
我不需要要求人们列出修改清单
改变一切。这使得Python许可证无法使用。我也不介意
人们重新授权衍生作品 - 在
文档中简单的谢谢，主页的链接是我的基本要求。
问候，
模糊
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/atlantib...thonutils.html
I''d like to formalise slightly the license I release my projects
under. At the moment it''s ''free to use, modify, distribute and
relicense''. This is basically fine as I don''t want t oprevent people
using my work in commercial settings - but I would like to retain the
right to be identified as the author. I''d also like to prevent people
selling derivative works where my stuff forms the substantial part of
the poduct.
I''d prefer to use an OSI approved license - but it''s not essential.
I''ve been browsing through them and I can''t quite see any that
*exactly* fits the bill. Before I draft my own I wondered if anyone
had a reccomendation.
I don''t need to require people to make a list of amendments if they
change things. This puts the Python license out. I also don''t mind
people relicensing derivative works - a simple thanks in the
documentation and a link to the homepage is my basic requirement.
Regards,
Fuzzy
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/atlantib...thonutils.html
推荐答案
Michael Foord写道：
Hi,
Michael Foord wrote:
我也想阻止人们出售衍生作品，其中我的东西构成了
产品。
我更愿意使用OSI认可的许可证 - 但这不是必需的。
I''d also like to prevent people
selling derivative works where my stuff forms the substantial part of
the poduct.
I''d prefer to use an OSI approved license - but it''s not essential.
这两个人不能一起去。阅读6。没有歧视领域
of Endeavor"在The Open Source Definition[0]。
J
[0] http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
Joachim Bowman写道：
Joachim Bowman wrote:
这两个人不能一起去。阅读6。不鼓励对奋斗的领域进行歧视在开源定义[0]中。
[0] http://www.opensource.org/docs /definition.php
These two don''t go together. Read "6. No Discrimination Against Fields
of Endeavor" in "The Open Source Definition"[0]. [0] http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
是的，关于软件许可的另一个主题。
顺便说一句模糊，只是使用您自己的
许可方案发布您的软件。如果您不喜欢任何可用的OSI
许可证，那么就不要使用它们，就像那样简单。
一方面 ; OSI批准的在另一方面意味着很少
无论如何，人们并不完全理解这些许可证，
长期，经常出现的GPL相关主题证明了这一点。
Istvan。
Yay, another thread on software licensing.
By the way Fuzzy, just release your software with your own
licensing scheme. If you don''t like any of the available OSI
licenses then don''t use them, as simple as that.
On one hand "OSI approved" means very little on the other
people do not completely understand these licenses anyway,
the long, recurrent GPL related threads demonstrate that.
Istvan.
Istvan Albert：
Istvan Albert:
顺便说一句模糊，只需用你自己的软件发布你的软件>许可计划。如果您不喜欢任何可用的OSI
许可证，那么就不要使用它们，就像那样简单。
By the way Fuzzy, just release your software with your own
licensing scheme. If you don''t like any of the available OSI
licenses then don''t use them, as simple as that.
然后你会觉得无聊关于你的许可证究竟是什么意思的邮件和
为什么你不把许可证改为我认识的像GPL这样的东西？许可证
问题必须是运行操作系统项目中最无聊的部分，我会希望能够放弃我的工作版权但不再是
似乎有可能。
Neil
Then you receive boring mails about what exactly your license means and
"why don''t you change the license to something I know like the GPL"? License
questions must be the most boring part of running an OS project and I would
love to be able to just renounce copyright on my work but it no longer
appears possible.
Neil
这篇关于开源许可证问题的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
