0a7242aed4
While the MIT license is a fantastic license for those too lazy (or unable) to understand more complex licenses it's too lax when it comes to protecting authors (= me). For example, there are no clauses regarding patents or ownership of source code. This means that patent trolls could, in theory, drag me to court. Of course one can still do that when using the MPL, but at least it has an explicit clause regarding patents. The MPL also provides a nice balance between the MIT license and the Apache license. I don't like the Apache license as it requires listing any significant changes in every changed file. In short, I don't really care what people do with my software (they could sell it for millions for all I care), as long as they don't drag me to court or otherwise hold me accountable for something. |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| css | ||
| .gitkeep | ||
| css_selectors.md | ||
| manually_creating_documents.md | ||
| migrating_from_nokogiri.md | ||
| xml_namespaces.md | ||