Talk:MIT/X11 License: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted

Inline

Latest revision as of 23:57, 20 January 2008

Are we using this? --Mwn3d 13:07, 19 January 2008 (MST)

I think a page linked here at one time. I wouldn't say no to having pages for common Open Source(tm)/Shared Source(tm) type licenses, as long as a disclaimer is included in each page. It's on the fringe of Rosetta Code's domain, though. It only makes sense in the context of license issues surrounding applications(mostly language implementations and operating systems) and libraries mentioned on RC. In short, I'm ambivalent on whether we currently need this page. Anyone else have an opinion? --Short Circuit 16:57, 20 January 2008 (MST)

Revision as of 20:07, 19 January 2008 (view source) rosettacode>Mwn3d (why?)		Latest revision as of 23:57, 20 January 2008 (view source) MikeMol (talk \| contribs) (Not sure. Anyone else have an opinion?)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Are we using this? --[[User:Mwn3d\|Mwn3d]] 13:07, 19 January 2008 (MST)		Are we using this? --[[User:Mwn3d\|Mwn3d]] 13:07, 19 January 2008 (MST)
			:I think a page linked here at one time. I wouldn't say no to having pages for common Open Source(tm)/Shared Source(tm) type licenses, ''as long as'' a disclaimer is included in each page. It's on the fringe of Rosetta Code's domain, though. It only makes sense in the context of license issues surrounding applications(mostly language implementations and operating systems) and libraries mentioned on RC. In short, I'm ambivalent on whether we ''currently'' need this page. Anyone else have an opinion? --[[User:Short Circuit\|Short Circuit]] 16:57, 20 January 2008 (MST)