Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Just a simple difference I know: Do you want to force users of your code to attribute the code to yourself? Then pick MIT/Apache


A much better reason is that you can't easily put things in the public domain and many countries don't recognize the public domain.


I'm no software license lawyer (and admittedly I haven't read Apache in depth), but I understand that the Apache license has at least one requirement I'm personally not too keen on.

4.2 in the license: "You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files", I'm not sure how "legal" it is to follow the convention of sticking a LICENSE file in the project root and have that assume to cover all contents therein, but that seems reasonable enough, versus 4.2.

I'd love to know further opinions on MIT vs. Apache.

[edit: engaged brain.]




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: