Re: computer-go: Sharing Go modules

[Daniel Bump <bump@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> The OpenSource license seems more like what I intend to do, except that I'm
> missing something. It seems reasonable to me to require anyone who uses my
> modules, in whole or in part, to include a notice of the fact. Similar as in
> scientific publications, where if it is based on other research or papers, a
> reference has to be included. Other than that the OpenSource license seems
> fine by me. Or am I being too vain to wish people to include a sentence like
> "This software uses the Tesuji Software Go library" either in the manual or
> on the screen?

What is the OpenSource license?

In the gnu.org list I see something called the ``Netizen Open Source
License.'' Is this what you are referring to?

The Open Source Foundation also has a collection of licenses
at http://www.opensource.org/licenses/index.html.

Normally I would recommend the X11 license as a model for
someone who does not want to use the GPL for the reason you cite.
It is a very simple license.

http://www.x.org/terms.htm

The BSD license is similar to the X11 license but originally
included an advertising requirement similar to what you described.
This advertising clause was rescinded after a lot of criticism.

A case against including an advertising clause may be found at:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html

Dan