Add a license

[DasEtwas]

No description provided.

[DasEtwas]

https://choosealicense.com/

I suggest GPLv3

[JuneCarya]

Strong copyleft license. We've talked in Discord about this and already came to the conclusion, that this might not be the right license for this project. It should be a weaker copyleft license.

[djsime1]

Mozilla Public License 2 is my suggestion.

[brentbatch]

MIT ?

[JuneCarya]

I think there are some questions that should be answered. We've discussed some of them on discord, but I guess it's better to have them here publicly so others can discuss with us.

What conditions do we impose upon contributors and users of this project?

• Has the source to be disclosed?
• What kind of license and copyright notice if any?
• Whether it has to be the same license for derivative work

What permissions do users have?

• Commercial use
• Private use
• Distribute this work or derivatives of it
• Whether modifications are covered

There certainly are more things that could be discussed, but I've mentioned some of the most common ones that often are listed as bullet points for most licenses.

[brentbatch]

I think there are some questions that should be answered. We've discussed some of them on discord, but I guess it's better to have them here publicly so others can discuss with us.

What conditions do we impose upon contributors and users of this project?

• Has the source to be disclosed?
• What kind of license and copyright notice if any?
• Whether it has to be the same license for derivative work

What permissions do users have?

• Commercial use
• Private use
• Distribute this work or derivatives of it
• Whether modifications are covered

There certainly are more things that could be discussed, but I've mentioned some of the most common ones that often are listed as bullet points for most licenses.

• Source is disclosed anyway since it's uploaded to steam and available to anyone.
• /
• Doesn't the license decide if derivative work has to have the same license?

[DasEtwas]

* Doesn't the license decide if derivative work has to have the same license?

Some do

[djsime1]

* Source is disclosed anyway since it's uploaded to steam and available to anyone.
* /
* Doesn't the license decide if derivative work has to have the same license?

• No, it means fork must provide any modifications they made to our stuff publicly
• "Don't steal our code without credit and kindly notify us what you're using it for."
• No, the license does. Doesn't mean the entire derivative has to use the license, it just means our stuff retains it's license.

[DasEtwas]

* No, the license does. Doesn't mean the entire derivative has to use the license, it just means our stuff retains it's license.

Some licenses mandate the whole derivative to be similarly or stricter licensed

[Alidonis]

i suggest passing a creative commons license

below is the Creative commons chooser beta , i recommend trying it.
https://chooser-beta.creativecommons.org/

[Alidonis]

for this project, knowing this is a remake of the modpack, here's my license proposition :

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

Advantages :
you retain ownership of the project.
you must be credited (BY)
No one can make money off of your work (NC)
The same license has to be used, AKA no over-licensing or sublicensing (SA)
latest license version (4.0)

i don't recommend NoDerrivatives. this is just being a dick, in my opinion.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/

[DasEtwas]

are CC licenses even sensible for source code?

[TechnologicNick]

for this project, knowing this is a remake of the modpack, here's my license proposition :

This is the original, not a remake.

[Xesau]

are CC licenses even sensible for source code?

Not really

[JuneCarya]

Well they are certainly not unreasonable. I think the question should be, is it sensible for this specific project?
I forgot that this issue was still open. We talked about some option before, maybe we should link them and list the key points of each.