On 16178 March 1977, lorenzo wrote:
I'm going to add ~20 service runscripts from my collection to a Debian package that I want to reintroduce in Debian, and I have to chose the license. For this project I mainly care about two things: 1. allow fast circulation (even if it's at cost of less protection) 2. make it easy for an upstream project to incorporate a runscript
The original Debian package is under BSD-3Clause, which I think it's fine for 1., but not sure for 2. Am I correct that, if I choose CC0/Public Domain, an upstream project can incorporate the runscript "as is" and change the license without asking for my permission? What about dual license -- something like "BSD-3Clause OR Service Upstream license" ?
Assuming fast == wide spread, then you want something with the smallest amount of requirement/restrictions for those taking it.
If you truly do not care who takes it and whyt they do with it, nor want to be mentioned anywhere, something like CC0 is your way.
If you, at least theoretically, want to have your name appear somewhere, but don't care much anything else, "MIT" (expat) or BSD 3 clause would be the thing.
If you do want to ensure it stays free software, other licenses apply.Now, point 2: None of those 3 licenses do make it any trouble whatsoever to use your code. (CC0 *IMO* the worst one, just from its size :) ).
-- bye, Joerg