Fork me on GitHub
#off-topic
<
2019-02-22
>
theeternalpulse00:02:33

just learned that racket can use brackets after going half-way through "the little schemer"

😎 5
theeternalpulse14:02:48

(cond [true #f] [else #t])

theeternalpulse14:02:27

I guess its a newer convention, but the reader doesn't care if you use (, {, or [

fellshard20:02:30

Yeah, it's definitely handy. I'm guessing most Racketeers have specific conventions for their use?

theeternalpulse21:02:03

Not sure, I thought all lisps were complete parens and clojure "solved it" but apperantly it took some lessons for racket. It's a little too open ended though, not like clojure's use for specific data structures.d

eccentric J21:02:19

I’ve got a licensing question. I’m preparing a release for a lein template, I’m going with EPL 2 and it wants a name with the copyright. The problem is I didn’t come up with the stack and I’m really just stringing together a lot of OSS libs. What is there to even copyright?

seancorfield21:02:53

You are the copyright holder on the template. You might want to manually add a note in the source file(s) / readme that portions of the template code are copyright <whoever> if you have lifted them as-is from other repos.

seancorfield21:02:47

You should also check the licensing on those repos -- you may need to include those licenses and copyright notices too, if they use difference licenses (and also make sure that they are compatible with the EPL 2 license!).

eccentric J21:02:05

Yeesh! Thanks for the info, I’ll create some tasks for this. Is it possible to not license the template and allow the deps to just use what they use?

seancorfield21:02:51

Does the template include (via copy'n'paste) code from other projects? Or is the template just your code and it depends on other projects?

seancorfield21:02:09

(I got the impression from your comment above that the former is true)

eccentric J21:02:55

There are two reagent view functions that I lifted but modified slightly, the rest are just dependencies.

seancorfield22:02:45

Hmm, I would probably add a docstring to the ns in your views.cljs that contains a link to the floki original `"Portions based on https://github.com/denisidoro/floki/blob/master/src/floki/debug/view.cljs" and leave it at that.

seancorfield22:02:23

And then just select a license for the template with your name as copyright holder -- for the template.

seancorfield22:02:18

If that's the only code in your entire template that was originally copied in from another project, I wouldn't worry about conflicting licenses either.

eccentric J22:02:35

Ah ok, thanks a ton!

seancorfield22:02:28

Floki is licensed under Apache which is a very forgiving license. It's what I always used to use for my OSS projects -- until I started doing Clojure and switched to EPL since that's the most common model in the Clojure world.

eccentric J22:02:07

I also credited him in both the README, the demo app it generates, and made an issue on his repo to make sure he’s cool with the project before I release it.

✔️ 10
seancorfield22:02:57

Sounds like you've done more due diligence than most people 🙂

😌 5
Chase22:02:01

this was an interesting convo. any resources you could recommend to read about various software licences and their pros and cons?

Chase22:02:57

You mentioned you always used Apache but then switched to EPL but I'm gathering that sometimes this choice could be completely out of your hands if you had used someone else's code with a conflicting licence?

seancorfield22:02:02

Yes, if you integrate code under some licenses, your hand could be forced. GPL, for example, is considered a "viral" license in that regard.

seancorfield22:02:14

http://opensource.org is a pretty good place to start.

seancorfield22:02:46

(especially the FAQ)

eccentric J22:02:21

Hmm kinda thinking I should switch to Apache then. I’d rather be more permissive, it’s just a template and not sure how many paid TUIs are getting built these days 😆

seancorfield22:02:36

I like ASL because it allows businesses to create commercial products based on your work. Some OSS folks specifically want to prevent that.

seancorfield22:02:20

When I worked at Macromedia/Adobe, OSS license review was "a big deal" and I got dragged into meetings with their legal team over some pieces of software we were using. In particular, one framework we used was LGPL as I recall and it generated code that we then needed to build on/extend -- and legal weren't having that at all, so we had to ask the project team if they would consider changing their license 😐

eccentric J22:02:47

How’d that go?

seancorfield22:02:50

(they did, they changed to ASL2)

seancorfield22:02:23

Lawyers can get very sensitive about OSS licenses 🙂