copyright/license

[ndantam]

Copyrights for GT authored code should be assigned to Georgia Tech Research Corporation.

We usually prefer the 2-clause BSD.

[mxgrey]

Right, I planned on editing it to match our standards. This was just what
Github offered to generate automatically.

Are we against the 3-clause BSD? It seems like the 3-clause protects us a
bit better than the 2-clause.

--Grey

On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Neil T. Dantam [email protected]:

Copyrights for GT authored code should be assigned to Georgia Tech
Research Corporation.

We usually prefer the 2-clause BSD.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/1
.

[ndantam]

On 02/06/2014 04:31 PM, Michael Grey wrote:

Right, I planned on editing it to match our standards. This was just what
Github offered to generate automatically.

Cool

Are we against the 3-clause BSD? It seems like the 3-clause protects us a
bit better than the 2-clause.

Practically speaking, there's not much actual difference...

However:
2-clause is simpler. FreeBSD and NetBSD use the 2-clause license.
Nearly all our other stuff is 2-clause BSD, so I'd suggest sticking with
that.

-ntd