Re: Guile extension module skeleton package available

[Dale P. Smith]

Nicholas Harbour wrote:
> 
> >After releasing, I began thinking about which licensing model would be
> >appropriate for such a thing.  I think it's quite useful and would
> >like to encourage people using it, without annoying them by saying:
> >``well use this code and replace most of it with your own, but always
> >make sure everyone will see my name when using it.''
> >
> >Also I think the copyright should not be more restrictive than
> >Guile's, so maybe I should use Guile's copyright including the
> >exception to the GPL.  Would that be the Right Thing?  I'm not sure.
> 
> I would think that just simply Public Domain would be the best option here.
> As foolish as it may seem, some companies these days are a little
> apprehensive of being "infested" with GPL code.  This seems to be a hot
> topic on several different forums right now.  PD would give it total freedom
> to be used by GPL programs as well as closed-source programs.  While I am
> sure that not many people here want to encourage closed-source development,
> this would only help to expand the usage of guile (which I would be a good
> thing!).

If someone was to start a module from scratch, all the files in the
skeleton would have to be created anyway.  Most of them would be very
similar or the same as the skeleton.  Doesn't really make sense to
copyright and license it to me.  Unless maybe the script that does the
customizations.

The FreeBSD example-driver-creator-thing puts your name in the copyright
info.  There is either a comment in the generated code or it asks for
your name and inserts it.

More $.02.

-Dale
-- 
Dale P. Smith
Treasurer, Cleveland Linux Users Group http://cleveland.lug.net
Senior Systems Consultant, Altus Technologies Corporation
address@hidden
440-746-9000 x309