Help choosing license for new projects

[geremy condra]

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Jake b <ninmonkeys at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm starting a new python code project. What license do you suggest? I
> am searching, but I'm not finding a simple comparison of licenses. So
> I don't know which to use. Maybe MIT or Apache or LGPL or BSD?

Fair warning: I like and use the GPL a lot, so I'm biased. Take my
advice with a grain of salt and recognize that while everybody has
some semi-rational basis for the license they choose, in the end the
decision is likely to be made on dogmatic grounds.

> Are there certain licenses to avoid using because of interaction
> problems between libraries using GPL2 / GPL3 / MIT / LGPL. / BSD with
> my own?

Generally, GPL'd code likes GPL'd code and BSD/MIT etc are more
free-form. Depending on what you leverage this may or may not be a
problem for you.

> I want:
> 1] Pretty much let anyone use it. Users do not have to include source
> code, as long as I get credit. (which I think normallly is a textfile
> with project url + name?)

GPL is pretty much out then. CC-BY-* may be the way to go.

> 2] (if it matters) I will be using different combinations of pyglet,
> pygame, wxPython, etc.

Not going to dig through those to find the licenses for you. Be aware
that their choices impact yours.

> 3] I want the option to use my own code in something commercial at a later date.

Not generally an issue. Even GPL lets you sell your stuff.

> Does #3 complicate things, or is fine when including author info?

If you have many contributors it can.

> The choices for google code projects are:
>  Apache License 2.0

Good choice, not my flavor but it does preserve attribution.

>  Eclipse license 1.0

Small license, doesn't give you the same degree of legal muscle that
some others will if it gets violated.

>  GPLv2
>  GPLv3

Both out on the source-not-required part. Personally, I like them (and
the Artistic License) for exactly that reason.

>  GNU lesser GPL

Fewer restrictions on linking, etc, but probably not what I would
recommend here.

>  MIT license

Good choice, well understood and widely used. Note that attribution is
not preserved, although copyright is. That may or may not be enough
for you.

>  Mozilla Public license 1.1

I'd avoid it, same caveats for the eclipse license and few obvious advantages.

>  New BSD License

Also a good choice, same caveat as the X11 license.

Geremy Condra