[MITgcm-devel] [MITgcm-support] MITgcm license

Thu Jan 12 14:35:49 EST 2017

Hi Chris et al.,
I am not sure how CVS aliases work but maybe it would make sense to add LICENSE.txt to the lists 
that I assume are behind MITgcm_code, MITgcm_verif_basic, MITgcm_tutorials, MITgcm_verif_all ?
Cheers,
Gael

On May 11, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Chris Hill <cnh at mit.edu> wrote:

> OK - lets see what feedback we get over the next month.
> I would be happy to do this, but we should give
> a chance for feedback.
> 
> BTW - should the top line maybe read
> 
> Copyright (c) 2016 MITgcm Developers and Contributors
> 
> there are things in the code base that are derived from a
> range of sources that go beyond the group that is
> usually thought of as the Developers.
> 
> Chris
> 
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Ryan Abernathey
> <ryan.abernathey at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, I know everyone is busy with real science, and in comparison this seems
>> frivolous. I certainly don't wish to waste anyone's time with silly legal
>> stuff. But you must admit that it is strange that such a mature software
>> project does not have a license.
>> 
>> This doesn't have to be complicated. I propose we adopt the MIT license and
>> be done with it. Simply create a LICENSE.txt file in the root directory of
>> the project and paste in the following text.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> MIT License
>> 
>> Copyright (c) 2016 MITgcm Developers
>> 
>> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
>> of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to
>> deal
>> in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
>> to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
>> copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
>> furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
>> 
>> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
>> all
>> copies or substantial portions of the Software.
>> 
>> THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
>> IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
>> FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
>> AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
>> LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
>> FROM,
>> OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN
>> THE
>> SOFTWARE.
>> 
>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Chris Hill <cnh at mit.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Not really, but if there is interest in an unconventional approach
>>> maybe we could try it! I think it is probably not a great idea though.
>>> 
>>> More seriously - if anyone wants to put forward
>>> ideas or thoughts that would be great. The copyright stuff
>>> is interesting. My understanding is it reflects the interests
>>> of publishers lawyers (RIAA, Elsevier etc...) and "the
>>> establishment" more than the will of "the people". There are
>>> some famous Columbia law school lectures on this I think. I
>>> don't stay up at night worrying about law suits. I do worry a
>>> little about stirring up lawyers if we do decide to handle
>>> this in a seriously conventional way.
>>> 
>>> Things in this realm that I do worry about are
>>> making sure that people get adequate credit, DOIs
>>> etc...
>>> 
>>> But mostly I am more losing sleep over tuning up and
>>> speeding up 1-2km global calculations, internal
>>> waves, calculating eddy fluxes, how we should
>>> engage with CESM, maintaining adequate funding and
>>> infrastructure to do all the things we could do etc....
>>> 
>>> For better or worse MIT does not have a law school.
>>> 
>>> Chris
>>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Ryan Abernathey
>>> <ryan.abernathey at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>> 
>>>> Are you proposing the WTFPL for MITgcm? I would be in favor--it seems
>>>> like
>>>> an appropriately permissive license and in keeping with our general
>>>> disregard for the norms of polite behavior.
>>>> 
>>>> This article provides a very informative discussion of why a license is
>>>> important:
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.astrobetter.com/blog/2014/03/10/the-whys-and-hows-of-licensing-scientific-code/
>>>> 
>>>> Another good choice, and an obvious one, is the MIT license.
>>>> http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/
>>>> 
>>>> -Ryan
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Chris Hill <cnh at mit.edu> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> There is an interesting thread on this topic here
>>>>> 
>>>>>  http://www.wtfpl.net/about/
>>>>> and here
>>>>>  http://www.wtfpl.net/faq/
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Ryan Abernathey
>>>>> <ryan.abernathey at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Dimitris Menemenlis
>>>>>> <dmenemenlis at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> you are welcome to use the MITgcm free of charge, as long as you
>>>>>>> purchase
>>>>>>> a beer per successful compilation for MITgcm developers :-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Clearly this has always been the de-facto license policy!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> But really, is there nothing more official? I know many of the
>>>>>> developers
>>>>>> are strong advocates of open source. It seems strange not to clearly
>>>>>> document the license of such a big project as MITgcm.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (you would of course be included in the developers list and so would
>>>>>>> benefit from some of the beer!)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On May 10, 2016, at 2:01 PM, Ryan Abernathey
>>>>>>> <ryan.abernathey at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What is the software license for MITgcm?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I found at least three support emails asking the question
>>>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/pipermail/mitgcm-support/2012-January/007613.html
>>>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/pipermail/mitgcm-support/2009-November/006334.html
>>>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/pipermail/mitgcm-support/2005-November/003591.html
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But no replies. Neither is there any license information in the
>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>> directory.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Could someone please resolve this issue? I want to know the license
>>>>>>> information for a review paper I am involved with.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>> Ryan
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>>>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 1843 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mitgcm.org/pipermail/mitgcm-devel/attachments/20170112/e8d6782e/attachment.p7s>