Re: [tlug] [OT] Say _no_ to the Microsoft Office format as an ISO standard

["Josh Glover" <jmglov@example.com>]

On 04/07/07, Darren Cook <darren@example.com> wrote:

> When I need a library for a client project typically I only consider
> MIT/BSD.

This is a great point, and this is why I use the BSDv2 / MIT licence
exclusively.

I am a professional software engineer, and most of the code I write
does not belong to me in a legal sense (my sense of "ownership" of the
code is purely technical). I hate reinventing the wheel, so I rejoice
when someone has written something under a BSD licence that I can
either just use as-is or derive from. Perl's Artistic licence, aside
from being a cheeky pun, is wonderful for this reason as well; many
CPAN modules are crap, but I can add error-checking and reformat for
increased readability and then use that code in my stuff.

I want other people like me to be able to benefit from my code, so I
use the BSD/MIT licence.

I have fought hard to get every employer of mine to allow me to Open
Source as much of my work as possible, and have been reasonably
successful:

INCOGEN  http://incogen.com/index.php?type=General&param=open+source
- INCarchive  http://sourceforge.net/projects/incarchive

TFCCI
- dcprof  http://sourceforge.net/projects/dcprof
- mkDoxy  http://sourceforge.net/projects/mkdoxy
- VirtualBookshelf  http://sourceforge.net/projects/vbs
- dclog  http://sourceforge.net/projects/dclog

In none of these cases was I compelled to release by the GPL or a like
viral licence.

--
Cheers,
Josh