-
|
Why have you chosen GPL3 license? It's quite strict. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 1 comment 3 replies
-
|
The main idea is that I don't want people to build bots using botcraft to grief servers without open-sourcing the code, so server owners can more easily counter them. Now I'm not an expert of license, but with a more permissive license like MIT, I think it would be allowed to do such things without sharing the code, while it is not under GPL3. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Compiling botcraft as a shared library would not require the person to share their code because it isn't linking with GPLv3 code. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Sharing the code is only required if you're distributing the program. You don't have to share the code if you keep the program private. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
If you want to require them to share the code even if they aren't distributing binaries of their bot, use the AGPL. That way, communicating with the bot online would count as distribution. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
The main idea is that I don't want people to build bots using botcraft to grief servers without open-sourcing the code, so server owners can more easily counter them.
Now I'm not an expert of license, but with a more permissive license like MIT, I think it would be allowed to do such things without sharing the code, while it is not under GPL3.