notmm is dead!
animelovin at gmail.com
Fri Oct 5 12:43:47 CEST 2012
No. All past notmm licenses were and still ARE ISC licensed. The license fee
is simply because I'm shifting into commercial license for new releases, including
the newer 0.4.5 version... Pypi was not the authority source for notmm and
neither anyone can claim the license was left blank, thats once again a form of plagiarism.
Shall anyone is really serious about supporting the work i did then he'll want to pay a minimal fee to get
the proper license rights and can contact me off-list if he want to fork a branch
to github of google code.
On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 20:39:55 -0600
Michael Torrie <torriem at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/04/2012 05:13 PM, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> > Thanks, but I tried all that and don't have much energy for continuing. If you're
> > serious about open source then maybe you can forward the thread to django-developers
> > and get some fundings to pay for a minimalistic fee to get the project maintained
> > by someone else, otherwise I'd prefer sticking with more profitable activities.
> Nothing in the existing license prevents someone from taking the latest
> source and posting it back on Pypi as an unmaintained package. Isn't
> that correct?
> What are you referring to when you say "minimalistic fee." Would this
> be a fee you require for transferring copyright assignment? I know of
> no fee necessary for a new maintainer to take over should one wish to.
> Copyright assignment is not strictly necessary.
Green Tea Hackers Club
Fine Software Carpentry For The Rest Of Us!
erob at gthcfoundation.org
More information about the Python-list