From: Fred
Subject: Beerware

Beerware is fun.
But it is legally impractical, and makes it difficult to package and
include the software in distributions and repositories.

It would be good if you used a "real" license instead, such as the BSD
or ISC license.

== 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8<

Hello,

you must be kidding, beerware is "public domain". Period.

I will not refrain from using my favourite license just because some stupid
package maintainer wants to force his limited world view on all software
authors.

Btw., which of my software are you referring to?

== 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8<

Fred wrote:

> I am referring to openTracker.

Okay, I see. In BSD-World beerware is much more common, none of my
projects there ever raised any license issues. so I think, you've got a
linux-background, then.

> Wikipedia does not mention 'beerware' as public domain, it mentions it
> as freeware.
>
> Also, not all countries do have public domain. For the countries that
> do have public domain, the laws are sometimes different.
>
> You refer to beerware as a license (your favorite license), yet you
> claim it is public domain. Something that is public domain is NOT
> covered by a license.

Whatever. You know... I'm giving my software away. For free. I'm just
asking everyone not to claim it's theirs. And if someone ever meets me
and wants to thank me for some time he saved, some fun he's had or for
something he learned by scrolling through the source code, he's invited
to join me for a beer, probably paying for it, if he can afford it.

I AM putting my software in the public domain by that and I don't care
if you think I don't. I also keep my own repository and for most of my
software do the versioning myself. If you do not like the license this
software comes with, just don't use, package or distribute it.

Some private words in the end: the license fascism you annoy me with
illustrates everything what's wrong in the open source world today. I am
a programmer and when I was young we cared for the software. Nowadays
it's all about restricting who's allowed to do what with source code not
even written.

Get a life,

  erdgeist

== 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8< == 8<

Yes, I am from a Linux background.
However, I think the BSD license is a great one.
The BSD operating systems are interesting too.

But licensing is important to be clear, so people can know exactly
what they can do with it.
For legal reasons, it needs to be very clear, and not disambigious.

I think that it is great that you give away your software for free.

But people may be confused under what terms the can use it, package
and redistribute it, because you claim its public domain, yet you
claim its under a license, and then it cant be public domain, if its
covered by a license.
It can be one, it cant be both.

I think open source is great, but licensing is an issue which needs to
be very clear for legal reasons.
It must not be contradictory.