Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 23:36:50 +0400
From: Solar Designer <>
Subject: Re: Unit tests

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 01:54:42PM +0200, Christian Neukirchen wrote:
> Solar Designer <> writes:
> > What license is it going to be under?  I propose cut-down BSD (to the
> > point of being copyright only, with no restrictions):
> >
> > This software is Copyright (c) YEAR YOUR NAME <your at e-mail.address>,
> > and it is hereby released to the general public under the following terms:
> >
> > Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> > modification, are permitted.
> >
> > This should be compatible with any other Open Source license, which I
> > think is a plus.  We currently use this for contributions to JtR:
> >
> >
> >
> > I see little reason to have GPL-like restrictions on the unit tests;
> > I think that would do more harm than good.
> A court-proven formulation of this is the
> I think.

What do you mean by it being court-proven?  (There's probably something
I am not aware of, which is not surprising given that I'm not really
into licensing.)

I dislike the requirement "... provided that the above copyright notice
and this permission notice appear in all copies."  I am not a lawyer,
but I think this doesn't allow derived versions to be placed under
certain other licenses (that would not give the same rights).


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.