Feature request: per-method licensing information.

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Feature request: per-method licensing information.

Michael van der Gulik
Hi all.

With recent changes proposed to the way that methods and method source
is stored, I thought I'd present the following idea:

Could we have a "license" field in each method? That way I can specify,
for example, that I've given permission for all of /my/ code to be
released under the MIT license, or "any" license acceptable to the
Squeak foundation.

So then we can see who wrote the code and under what license they chose
to release it under.

Michael.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature request: per-method licensing information.

timrowledge

On 17-Oct-06, at 12:07 PM, Michael van der Gulik wrote:

> Hi all.
>
> With recent changes proposed to the way that methods and method  
> source is stored, I thought I'd present the following idea:
>
> Could we have a "license" field in each method? That way I can  
> specify, for example, that I've given permission for all of /my/  
> code to be released under the MIT license, or "any" license  
> acceptable to the Squeak foundation.
>
> So then we can see who wrote the code and under what license they  
> chose to release it under.

I don't think that would be practical - consider the space cost. What  
*could* be done is a small extension of what is already done, which  
is to add this to the method preamble along with the author initials.  
That would cost space only in the source repository (see, I'm not  
saying file because we want to get away from that assumption :-) and  
not in the image.

tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Strange OpCodes: FSRA: Forms Skip and Run-Away