[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org
From: |
bill-auger |
Subject: |
Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org |
Date: |
Sun, 4 Apr 2021 03:15:51 -0400 |
On Sun, 04 Apr 2021 00:53:39 -0400 Richard wrote:
> > "We recommend that you use the GPLv3-or-later for your project"
> Do you see anything in the site that seems to lead people in another
> direction?
no, it is not the norm - most forges do not mention _anything_
about specific licenses - not a single word
the norm is simply a 'drop-down' option selector, with terse
labels: [ 'BSD', 'MIT', 'GPL3', 'None', .... ] - the only
priority, which anyone may interpret from it, is the vertical
order of the options
the options are presented once, upon new repo instantiation; and
the result is only to initialize the new repo with a license
file and an empty README
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, bill-auger, 2021/04/01
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/04/02
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, bill-auger, 2021/04/03
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/04/04
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org,
bill-auger <=
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/04/05
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, bill-auger, 2021/04/05
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/04/07
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, bill-auger, 2021/04/17
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/04/17
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Aaron Wolf, 2021/04/18
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/04/19
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/04/30
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/04/07