While reading the "License change redux" thread in the Announcements,
I'd noticed that Oolite 1.6.5 could be considered as dual-licensed, i.e. distributed under either GPL or CC-by-nc-sa-2.
While investigating source code, downloaded from svn as described at the "Running Oolite-Mac" wiki page, I'd found "License.txt" file with states what Oolite is under "Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License".
Also, all the source files reference same license.
Which statement is more correct?
(sorry, forum prohibits me to post URLs)
Oolite source code confusion
Moderators: winston, another_commander
- DaddyHoggy
- Intergalactic Spam Assassin
- Posts: 8515
- Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:43 pm
- Location: Newbury, UK
- Contact:
Welcome to the boards. I can't answer your question (although I think the former is correct) - but to let you know you should be able to post urls after your next post or two (it's a limited anti-spam protection measure).
Oolite Life is now revealed hereSelezen wrote:Apparently I was having a DaddyHoggy moment.
- JensAyton
- Grand Admiral Emeritus
- Posts: 6657
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 2:43 pm
- Location: Sweden
- Contact:
The statement in the License Change Redux thread is correct:
The 1.65 source code release (there is no 1.6.5) has not been updated because, well, 1.65 has not been updated.The current official release, 1.65, … may be distributed under its current license … or the GPL.
E-mail: [email protected]