[Biopython-dev] Adopting BSD 3-Clause license for Biopython?

[João Rodrigues]

+1. Whatever makes it easier to incorporate our code in other projects, namely having a more 'popular' yet legally similar license.


Cheers, 




João

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Christian Brueffer
> <christian at brueffer.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Peter initiated this discussion about changing the Biopython license to one
>> of the standard ones (3-clause BSD or MIT) some time ago, but it never went
>> anywhere :-)
> Specifically the BSD 3-Clause ("BSD New" or "BSD Simplified") license,
> as the closest to our current license. This is also used by the NumPy
> project and many other Python libraries:
> http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause
>> Now with 1.66 out, I think we should revisit this question.  The few people
>> who responded last time (just Tiago and I, if I see correctly) were in favor
>> of a change.
> Biopython co-founder Andrew Dalke was also positive, and gave
> some interesting history about the original license choice:
> http://lists.open-bio.org/pipermail/biopython-dev/2013-August/019941.html
> Assuming the core developers are in all agreement, we could ask
> the OSI for a legal opinion about if we can make this change without
> explicit approval of all the contributors. IANAL but this sounds possible.
> Otherwise, I think we need to start a module by module, or at least
> Python file-by-file audit moving each file to a dual license ("Biopython
> License Agreement" and/or the "BSD 3-Clause").
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> Biopython-dev mailing list
> Biopython-dev at mailman.open-bio.org
> http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.open-bio.org/pipermail/biopython-dev/attachments/20151105/d6db33c8/attachment.html>