From javier at candeira.com  Mon Dec  1 10:50:43 2014
From: javier at candeira.com (Javier Candeira)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 20:50:43 +1100
Subject: [melbourne-pug] Thanks for coming to MPUG!
Message-ID: <CAKADsbdh8TZrfQzXKBRinrjMEesdMJrZp+0=y2nCJvuhBNsjcw@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks to everyone who came to MPUG: those who attended, and our
presenters Ed, Scott and especially Ken, who prepared his talk at
short notice.

The next session will be on February 2nd 2015. Stay tuned!

Cheers,

Javier & the organisers.

From xr.lists at gmail.com  Thu Dec  4 00:57:46 2014
From: xr.lists at gmail.com (Alexander)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 12:57:46 +1300
Subject: [melbourne-pug] OS license requirements
In-Reply-To: <854mxh8hh7.fsf@benfinney.id.au>
References: <53E80F97.8030008@dewhirst.com.au>
 <1fbc42b4-7f95-4d70-8a96-acd79ae27844@googlegroups.com>
 <1407768703501.74668@greenberg.pro>
 <CADt_azYxo0ehS9LRRnbyiCG4hkEGnL_C85G-RbrtT30DyzEf=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <854mxh8hh7.fsf@benfinney.id.au>
Message-ID: <CAGxWq1U7wC2xLzixGJ8L9DkW6NOv2+smAoH-8f_3HgatrCHmYA@mail.gmail.com>

Just my 20 cents:

1. My personal opinion - I would strongly prefer people to re-use quality
code in their work projects (which are not necessarily open-source). What
exactly are you trying to protect here?
2. International law is complex. Even professional lawyers do not
understand it in full. Why would you expect GPL or other convoluted
nonsense to work or to provide any benefits, compared to simple and clear
MIT/BSD licenses?

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Ben Finney <ben+python at benfinney.id.au>
wrote:

> Noon Silk <noonslists at gmail.com> writes:
>
> > There's also this:
> >     - https://github.com/pygy/The-Romantic-WTF-Public-License
>
> While it's natural for people who like programming to also experiment
> with writing their own license texts, it is to be strongly discouraged.
>
> Please, do not consider the license landscape to be an open banquet. The
> vast majority of lesser-known license texts out there are poor choices.
>
> Law does *not* work according to pure logic, and the ramifications of a
> particular license text can be both confusing, seemingly-nonsensical,
> *and* real nevertheless.
>
> We non-lawyers are not experts in discerning the many effects of a
> license text, and we should not be choosing a license merely because it
> seems to say what we want.
>
> Worse, the effects of a license for software have ramifications beyond
> one's own work: the recipient will often want to combine several works,
> and needs to satisfy all the licenses simultaneously. A little-known
> license will more often make this onerous or impossible, simply because
> it has not been tested as widely in combination with others.
>
> When choosing a license for software, please, choose one of the very
> widely-understood and widely-implemented free software licenses: the GNU
> licenses (GPL v3 ?or, at your option, any later version?); the Apache
> License 2.0; the Expat (sometimes called ?MIT?) license; the 2-clause
> BSD license. Others are a distant lower option, *because* they're less
> widely used.
>
> --
>  \           ?I do not believe in forgiveness as it is preached by the |
>   `\        church. We do not need the forgiveness of God, but of each |
> _o__)                    other and of ourselves.? ?Robert G. Ingersoll |
> Ben Finney
>
> _______________________________________________
> melbourne-pug mailing list
> melbourne-pug at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/melbourne-pug/attachments/20141204/c65cd68d/attachment.html>