OpenEuphoria

Re: ESL license

• Posted by Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com> Jul 25, 2005
• 503 views

Pete Lomax wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 15:21:55 -0700, Derek Parnell
> <guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
> 
> >And I quote ...
> >
> >--------------------NOTICE-------------------------------*
> >-- Software ID: win32lib
> >-- Version:     0.60.6 19/September/2004
> >-- Copyright:   (c) 2000 /"David Cuny" and friends
> >--              All rights reserved.
> >-- Licence:
> >-- This software is provided 'as-is', without any express or implied
> >warranty.
> >-- In no event will the authors be held liable for any damages arising from
> >-- the use of this software.
> >--
> >-- Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose,
> >-- including commercial applications, and to alter it and redistribute it
> >-- freely, subject to the following restrictictions:
> >-- 1. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not
> >--    claim that you wrote the original software.
> >-- 2. If you use this software in a product, acknowedgement in the product's
> >--    documenation and binary are required.
> >-- 3. Altered source versions, and works substantially derived from the it,
> >--    must...
> >--   a) be plainly be marked as such,
> >--   b) not be misrepresented as the original software,
> >--   c) include this notice, unaltered.
> >--------------------End of NOTICE------------------------*
> 
> I've always felt oddly ill at ease with 3 c). Maybe it should say:
> include this notice, unaltered, preceded by "Based on:"?

That is how I envisaged it too, but I didn't want to stipulate *how* is was to
be included, just that it needed to be there somewhere. The reason is to ensure
that third-derivitive works are fully aware of the original licence, and to
highlight the original licence so that it can't itself be misrepresented.

> 2. might also have (unless this source is shipped unaltered with the
> product, or won't work without a separate download of this source).

I'm don't follow you. Want do you mean here?

> Just my thoughts, nothing serious,
> Pete
> PS I also think that the ESL, as a "carefully selected collection of
> snippets of code from various authors" would be unfair to *require*
> acknowledgement in the documentation and binaries that use it, as it
> is frankly too difficult to compile a complete and honest list of all
> those that may have originally contributed lines of code. Such
> acknowledgement should instead be "appreciated but not required".
> Again, that is just my personal opinion, though.

I was not thinking that each and every individual be acknowledged. As you can
see from Win32lib, only David Cuny is explicitly named. In fact, my name only
appears once in the source files and then only as a part of its history. In the
change log, I've tried to name contributors but that is not a part of the
licence.

-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
Skype name: derek.j.parnell