AutoHotkey Community

So we came up to GNU General Public License (GPL). Public Domain (PD) means, that everyone can use the code without the need of credit him/her. That is something, which I dont like. I always license my codes (if not trivial) under the GPL.

To me, a precise credit in source is a must have. Who gives you the reliability that the credit is available in the forum after download. Who might know from where the code is, if you just compile and replulish the work of others in that way?

How about adding some sort of license agreement checkbox on postings with? like:

• Public Domain
• GNU GPL
• other (see in post or scrip)

I probably come late in this chat, but I want to give my point of view.

I really think AHK is a great tool (thanks again, Chris). But what makes it such a greater tool is the people who use it, share their ideas (and associated code) so we can use, learn, and reuse.

When someone makes something, wether it be useful for only one or for everyone, he deserves respect for the time spent in doing it from those who find it useful. So deserves Leonardo when we look at Mona Lisa.

And I think this respect goes through recognizing honestly what has been done by those I borrow ideas or code from. That's why I give credit in my own work. What does it cost, to type 80 chars in a comment line ? Nothing, but it's the foundation of a good social environment, since it proves I respect others, their ideas and their work. To my mind, PD or licensing has nothing to do with it, since it's only a matter of respect, not a matter of law.

And as a good rule of thumb, I expect anyone who borrow some of my intellectual work to do as such to prove me they respect me. That's the reason why I usually ask for credit in my own code, though, as anyone do, I might sometimes forget it.

Last word : I will regret Sean as a great contributor.

I don't really support adding a feature to the forum for this. Including a short license (or a reference to one) in one's code should be sufficient.

If the legal standpoint is of concern to anyone, remember that anything you author is by default copyright to you, unless you've explicitly agreed otherwise. For example, if one of the terms for registering on this forum were that any code you post is by default under some specific license, or becomes the property of the forum owner, or whatever, then that condition prevails. Absent that or any indication by you otherwise, you hold copyright to your own original work.

Anyway, I'm posting to add another possibility to the list of licenses that can be used: the Boost license, at http://boost.org/more/license_info.html.

EDIT: I should have said that I believe in giving credit. Every time I incorporate someone else's work in my own code (when it's permitted, of course) I include something in the comments crediting the author, with a link to the source (forum post, web site, etc.) of the code. And if for whatever reason it's indicated that I'm not permitted to use the code, I don't use it. Most likely that would be about modifying or redistributing the code - there's not much point in posting source code if you don't intend to let people use it. But I would even honor that if the author stipulated it.

I did not read the Boost license and never hear from it before. I am not interested in such a not well known license. This is not, because it might not be a "good" system, but everyone who is serious have to read the text and understand the system.

Compared to GNU GPL, many people know it and it is widely spreaded and accepted and works good. Also mixing different Licenses if needed could lead to problems. So stay better at one type of license. That is the reason why I would encourage people to use GPL only.