kelvinAI have just watched
and the intial takeaway I had was at time 29:54 where he talked about licencing. He's putting everything under a Creative Commons Attribution license where he asks for his logo to be visible if a company sells it. I've been thinking about licensing pathways for the overall SecSavr project and a big part of it was the potential slicer I'd need to develop. I've got logos of my own and it makes sense to use them, and I also want to follow in MatterControl's footsteps, so that's 2 : 0 for [Permissive licenses] VS GPL v3.
Discussions
Become a Hackaday.io Member
Create an account to leave a comment. Already have an account? Log In.
Is there something specifically in v3 that you would want over v2? For a lot of people v3 has a bad stigma (even though in some specific cases the controversial parts don't apply). If you did wind up going GPL, it might be wise to stick to v2 unless you had a specific reason for 3.
Are you sure? yes | no
It just seemed that GPL v3 was the most popular, meaning that there was a higher chance that some open source code would require a GPL v3 license than another one. Other than that, I'm just weighing my options against GPL in general.
Are you sure? yes | no