⚠ In case you've missed it, we have migrated to our new website, with a brand new forum. For more details about the migration you can read our blog post for website migration. This is an archived forum. ⚠

  •     

profile picture

about license



ethaizone

ethaizone
  • profile picture
  • Member

Posted 03 November 2011 - 03:46 AM

Can you provide another license of grocery CRUD? GNU is good for opensource but In my work, I must close my code because it's about security. GNU force users must provide their code in public. Another license that come in my mind is MIT. JQuery use it too.

Please consider. Thank you for your work.

PS. I'm Thai so don't strict in my English. XD

jobo

jobo
  • profile picture
  • Member

Posted 21 December 2011 - 10:31 AM

I agree with ethaizone. In my work, as a one-man shop producing software for sale, I must respect licenses, but I cannot use GPL. The problem with GPL is that ALL my work would have to be made public, including ALL of my software which includes grocery CRUD.

Ethaizone's suggestion of MIT seems good to me. It's used by Ruby on Rails, too.

Another option is to use LGPL. This is Lesser GPL. Smarty uses this (see discussion here http://www.smarty.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20177&highlight=licence+license)

onyxriverman

onyxriverman
  • profile picture
  • Member

Posted 02 January 2012 - 02:37 AM

I agree with both ethaizone and jobo. Please choose a different license type, or at least explain why you feel GPLv3 is necessary. If you wish to defend the GPL, and that is your right, then I am forced to not use groceryCRUD due to its restrictive and draconian terms.

web-johnny

web-johnny
  • profile picture
  • Administrator
  • 1,166 posts

Posted 02 January 2012 - 11:30 AM

Just changed the licenses https://github.com/s...2f86a2666f218f6 . Now Grocery CRUD is released with dual licensing, using the GPL v3 and the MIT license. You can use both licenses in every version from 1.1 or later. For more you can read the full licence of grocery CRUD.

PS. @onyxriverman , I don't think that to use GPLv3 is a draconian term! They are many custom licenses that for example have: "All copyright information, links and logos within the HTML footer, must remain intact to use this library..." as a LICENSE condition. I chose GPL license to keep this project improved from other developers too. I just didn't know that you have to copy all the files INCLUDED your projects files that use this library.

onyxriverman

onyxriverman
  • profile picture
  • Member

Posted 02 January 2012 - 16:28 PM

[quote name='web-johnny' timestamp='1325503830' post='207']
PS. @onyxriverman , I don't think that to use GPLv3 is a draconian term! There really many customs licenses that for example have: "All copyright information, links and logos within the HTML footer, must remain intact to use this library..." as a LICENSE condition. I chose GPL license to keep this project improved from other developers too. I just didn't know that you have to copy all the files INCLUDED your projects files that use this library.
[/quote]

Thank you for replying! I would also like to apologize for using the term draconian. That was a bit extreme and unfair of me.

Without a doubt, you deserve all credit for creating this, and I do not intend to claim it as my own. You will be appropriately credited when your code is used in production.

I will report any bugs or improvements that I can think of, but I am not so certain that I would be able improve on this already elegant solution. :)

Again I want to thank you for changing the license. I hope that one day, I can compensate you for your effort.