Lua Anti-DDoS addition #49
Comments
|
Added. |
This does not exactly inspire confidence. The repository is otherwise unlicensed. @bungle are you sure this deserves a spot on the list? |
|
I can remove / alter the copyright disclaimer if users wish. What is the
best disclaimer to use for opensource ?
…On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 3:22 PM LoganDark ***@***.***> wrote:
Legal Usage :
For those who wish to use this in production you should contact me to
purchase a private license to use this legally.
For those who wish to use this in a commerical enviorment contact me to
come to an agreement and purchase a commerical usage license.
For those who wish to purchase the rights to this from me contact me also
to discuss pricing and terms and come to a sensible agreement.
This does not exactly inspire confidence. The repository is otherwise
unlicensed. @bungle <https://github.com/bungle> are you sure this
deserves a spot on the list?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#49 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC5DUK7IG5GBGV62XQWUPV3VIPKR5ANCNFSM4IOZSC7A>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
The license your project is currently using is known as "all rights reserved" and that basically means that nobody can use your code without first contacting you and negotiating, which is not free or open source at all. The best thing you can do for open-source is to use a permissive open-source license rather than "contact me for details". Even the SSPL (Server-Side Public License), which requires users to make public their entire software stack and its configuration, is more permissive than All Rights Reserved (however, it's not exactly a free and open source license). However, that is an extremely strong copyleft license to use for such a small script (a.k.a. it scares people away just like ARR), so I would recommend MIT instead, which requires preserving credit for your work, but not much else. |
|
Thanks LoganDark, I will change it to MIT instead since it preserves credit
since I did not want to add "No License" because default copyright law
would have made it bad for users to engage with the project. But seeing how
popular it is I would like for the community to enjoy it and of course
those who contribute preserve credit for contributors too at that point so
it's a win all around.
I will do this right now.
…On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 3:13 PM LoganDark ***@***.***> wrote:
The license your project is currently using is known as "all rights
reserved" and that basically means that nobody can use your code without
first contacting you and negotiating, which is not free or open source at
all.
The best thing you can do for open-source is to use a permissive open-source
license <https://choosealicense.com/> rather than "contact me for
details".
Even the SSPL (Server-Side Public License
<https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license>), which
requires users to make public their *entire software stack* and its
configuration, is more permissive than All Rights Reserved. However, that
is an extremely strong copyleft license to use for such a small script
(a.k.a. it scares people away just like ARR), so I would recommend MIT
<https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/> instead, which requires
preserving credit for your work, but not much else.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#49 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC5DUK4B7D7PQJ34Q3Q4LFLVJUG2JANCNFSM4IOZSC7A>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
May I interest you in the Unlicense then? |
|
Looks awesome, My only question is obviously contributors would want
crediting for their submissions, Maybe not all but some of them if i stick
with MIT this allows them credit if i make it unlicensed I assume their
contributions they have to explicitly say they want them to be licensed
unlicensed ?
…On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 3:27 PM LoganDark ***@***.***> wrote:
default copyright law would have made it bad for users to engage with the
project
May I interest you in the Unlicense <https://unlicense.org/> then?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#49 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC5DUK7DXHJDLZUZ6C7IWUDVJUINBANCNFSM4IOZSC7A>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
The MIT only requires preserving the copyright notice itself, not the credits of all contributors (unless of course you include them in the license notice). I was more referring to preserving credit of you (for example, "Copyright 2022 C0nw0nk", or your real name). Common practice when providing credit to contributors is to have a I'm not a lawyer, but a pull request usually serves as the disclaimer that the provided code is to be licensed under the repository's license, although a dedicated disclaimer never hurts (some repositories still require it). Note that this is separate from repositories requiring a CLA which does require a dedicated disclaimer, but that's a whole other can of worms. (Basically, CLAs typically create the ability for the repository owner to change licenses without having to ask for permission from everyone who has ever contributed code, but pull requests do not include that grant by default. I would not recommend adopting one for your project, though) |
I created a library that would be a good addition to your listing.
https://github.com/C0nw0nk/Nginx-Lua-Anti-DDoS
It is a javascript authentication page like Cloudflare, Bitmitigate and sucuri "I am under attack mode".
Looking to add my script to as many communities and lists as possible in order to help improve it! :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: