Re: [LAD] What KvR didn´t understand.

On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 14:20 +0100, Ove Karlsen wrote: This "license" is incredibly ambiguous and inadequate, so much so that calling it "open source" is a bit of a stretch. If you want to actually have your code be useful to people, use an existing established (e.g. OSI/FSF certified) license so that people can actually use it in projects without worry. Vanity licenses are just a pain for everybody; using them is the opposite of beneficent. Copyright licenses are not the place for statements of intent, hand-wavey language, and appeals "common sense". Put that stuff elsewhere and use a license that actually does the job of a licence. -dr