2Bdecided:
http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/ (http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/)
That f#cking license is f#cking freedom, I f#cking love it
I'm not enamoured by the language, but I wish more people would dare to release things with "no strings" in this way.
Truth is of course that, once you open source something (unless you can afford a lawyer) then whatever licence you choose, for all practical purposes you might as well have used the WTFPL!
Cheers,
David.
I'm not enamoured by the language, but I wish more people would dare to release things with "no strings" in this way.
The ISC license (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/isc-license.txt) is functionally equivalent to that (with the warranty clause included and you can keep the same name). I thought you might appreciate the cleaner language. :)
The ISC license (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/isc-license.txt) is functionally equivalent to that (with the warranty clause included and you can keep the same name). I thought you might appreciate the cleaner language.
No, it is not. It requires you to pass the license. WTFPL is still the only OSI approved license that I call free.
No, it is not. It requires you to pass the license. WTFPL is still the only OSI approved license that I call free.
I stand corrected. Can't believe I missed that
FYI, I couldn't find the WTFPL on OSI's website.
No, it is not. It requires you to pass the license. WTFPL is still the only OSI approved license that I call free.
I stand corrected. Can't believe I missed that
FYI, I couldn't find the WTFPL on OSI's website.
I made a mistake too.
It's FSF approved.