Re: [Savannah-hackers] savannah.gnu.org: submission of nethack-el

[Shawn Betts]

Loic Dachary <address@hidden> writes:

> Ryan Yeske writes:
>  > Loic Dachary <address@hidden> writes:
>  > 
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > We were wondering if there was the possibility of some sort of dual
>  > >  > licensing.  And, if not, is there the possibility of releasing
>  > >  > versions of the patch separately under different licenses?
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > Or, are there any other possible ways of being able to host the patch
>  > >  > on savannah and not create nasty license conflicts?
>  > >  > 
>  > > 
>  > >  Dual licensing the patch is a good idea. That would do the
>  > > trick.  Thanks for thinking hard and finaly find a solution, it is
>  > > very appreciated. 
>  > 
>  > We are very happy to hear that the dual licensing option will work.
>  > 
>  > How exactly do we go about dual licensing the patch?  What text should
>  > we use and where should it go?  In the patch itself?  Or in the
>  > COPYING file?
> 
>       I had another idea, even simpler. You could release the patch
> under the modified BSD license (adding a relatively short notice at
> the beginning of the patch that will be ignored by the patch program
> anyway). This license is compatible with the GNU GPL *and* any other
> license since it's an all permissive license.
> 
>       We don't usually recommend the use of the modified BSD license
> but in this case it seems appropriate and the patch is small enough that
> worrying about possible proprietarization is not really necessary. 
> 
>       What do you think ? 

That sounds fine. I can't imagine someone grabbing a nethack patch and
EXPLOITING our work :).