MPI.jl
MPI.jl copied to clipboard
JuliaParallel
Should MPI.jl's license be changed?
MPI.jl uses the "Unlicense" as license. Do we want to change that to something more mainstream?
@lcw I believe this was due to you: do you have any particular preferences now?
I would be pro-MIT license: as far as I know, the main difference is the acknowledgement requirement.
If there is a good reason I would be open to change however I would prefer to keep the code in the public domain. I don't know much about the different licenses. What do people think about using CC0?
"One important reason why Creative Commons licenses should not be used to release software is that they aren’t compatible with existing free software licenses, [...]" https://creativecommons.org/2011/04/15/using-cc0-for-public-domain-software/.
On the other hand, https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses says "If you want to release your work to the public domain, we recommend you use CC0. CC0 also provides a public domain dedication with a fallback license, and is more thorough and mature than the Unlicense."
"One important reason why Creative Commons licenses should not be used to release software is that they aren’t compatible with existing free software licenses, [...]" https://creativecommons.org/2011/04/15/using-cc0-for-public-domain-software/.
I think they say this for their Creative Commons licenses. It seems to me, they do not consider CC0 a license but instead a public domain dedication https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/.
Unless I'm missing it, CC0 isn't OSI-approved (and General requires OSI-approved licenses): https://opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical
To be fair, CC0 is the one cc thing (I would say license except that it's not, just a public domain dedication) that's often considered acceptable for software. I don't know if OSI has considered it, but FSF added it to their list https://creativecommons.org/2011/04/15/using-cc0-for-public-domain-software/
Oh, also it looks like the Unlicense already is on the OSI approved list: https://opensource.org/licenses/unlicense so this is all already compliant from that perspective.