Re: [pygame] PCR & other notes

[Scott Russell <scott@pantastik.com>]

And, of course, the very first file I open from the links Pete sent is:

bezier.py, donated by Robert Mark Waugh. Thanks! It's... licensed under
the MPL.  Heh.  Thanks again, for being the first to walk into our new
draconian must-be-public-domain policy. 

So, we we can't publish it unless it gets re-released PD, according to
what I was just saying...  How do people feel about this?  

Rene, how would you be licensing your bezier sample? :)

On Mon, 2003-03-24 at 12:37, Scott Russell wrote:
> Thanks for the links.
> 
> Regarding licensing: I haven't responded yet because I wanted to think
> on it longer, but I lean towards public doman as well, in which case a)
> no license is necessary, and b) the code can be used in gpl'ed products
> just fine.  Or BSD, artisitic, and proprietary apps.
> 
> Yes, this means that if you want to preserve credit, enforce "ongoing
> freeness", or prevent the military from using it, you'll have to find
> some other method to distribute your code samples to the public.  Would
> this discourage many of you? (Going now to check how the ASPN cookbook
> is "licensed.")
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2003-03-25 at 17:35, Pete Shinners wrote:
> > Scott Russell wrote:
> > > Absolutely - we can use as much input as possible.  And just as
> > > importantly, I need that tarball you owe me, Pete -- or I'm going to
> > > just scrape the data and rewrite the PCR from scratch. :)
> > 
> > my bad there. either my mind is slipping or my outgoing mail is randomly 
> > getting tripped up. and i'm pretty sure the server is ok.
> > 
> > current pcr site
> > http://www.pygame.org/ftp/contrib/pcr_site.tar.gz
> > 
> > current pcr submissions
> > http://www.pygame.org/ftp/contrib/pcr_submissions.tar.gz
> > 
> > 
> > sylvain also mentioned a license issue. i think GPL is too restrictive 
> > for something like a code cookbook. even BSD requires "credit to 
> > author", which is nice but i don't think should be required. currently 
> > the pcr is "public domain" which means you can do anything to anyone 
> > with the code. if there's a more appropriate license that defines this 
> > we could switch to that?
> >