https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459766 User cfarrell@novell.com added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459766#c6 Ciaran Farrell <cfarrell@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED Info Provider|cfarrell@novell.com | --- Comment #6 from Ciaran Farrell <cfarrell@novell.com> 2009-01-28 09:52:22 MST --- The GPL protects Novell's interests better than any other "open source" license. However, we need to consider what it actually is that is being licensed. Is choosing the GPL a bit "over the top" for some small shell scripts (this is not a rhetorical question - the decision on how to license the scripts is a business decision, not a legal decision)? The suggestion to use GPL is certainly not a bad one. To avoid GPL conflicts (which I'm not at all sure would actually ensue as there doesn't seem to be any creation of a derived work simply be having init scripts start e.g. samba) you could just make sure that the license is GPL compatible (be careful with GPLv2 and GPLv3). Thus, for relatively trivial works, we could use a BSD 3 clause license, or even an X11/MIT license. The LGPL provides lesser protection than the GPL, but again, you need to ask yourself or your manager, if this would be "over the top". Nomatter what license you opt for, you can find templates at: https://innerweb.novell.com/organizations/engineering/cas/opensource/copyrig... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.