I made a thing.
I made a thing.
codeberg.org
oats-lang
cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/52336135
9 comments
-
-
I think you need to put the actual license text in the repository, to have a license. Just stating a license name in the readme is not correctly licensed. In example people need to a websearch for this accronym in order to find their rights and who knows if they find the correct license. Maybe they find a different written one by another person. In example there are two "official" versions of this license: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL
-
-
In many countries in the world it makes a huge difference to not having a license. If its not properly licensed or licensed at all, then it means in many countries in the world the most restrictive one, the entire opposite of the goal: Do not use without permission. By not putting the license text and clearing things up for the user, means it is not properly licensed. Therefore in countries like Germany this project would be a violation to use without permission. It becomes a liability, as the person could potentially sue anyone (in those countries).
-
Not having a license is "All Rights Reserved". That's why I bothered with the license section in the readme at all.
-
-
I don't really want to clutter the repo with something so frivolous. If they were links or an SPDX ID would that be enough?
-
I don't think its enough to link. You just need to copy or create a single txt file named "LICENSE" and put it in the root of your repository. I am not a lawyer. The license text will tell anyone who cares to know what they can do and cannot with the project. If you do not do that, you only make it harder for anyone looking for the license (as explained with the websearch example previously).
-
-
9 comments
For those who don't want to click the link for context: