On 15-Dec-21 03:59, John Levine wrote:
It appears that Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> said:
In this case I think you're better off treating it as text. The only
advantage of the code license is that you can modify the code, but it
doesn't sound like that's an issue here.
If the pseudocode has any value, it would be to serve as framework
for an actual implementation. Both solutions seem wrong for that.
Frankly I'd prefer if it could be a DWTFYWWI license, but I don't think
the IETF Trust has one of those. Maybe we need a CC0 option too?
The trust license is non-exclusive. As the author, you can let people
do whatever you want with the stuff you wrote.
Yes indeed.
R's,
John
PS: The BSD license is effectively DWTFYWWIBDSU, where those last
letters stand for But Don't Sue Us.
I think that's why CC0 is more than a few words long, too.
Anyway, I'm seeing arguments why <CODE BEGINS> is reasonable for pseudocode.
Brian
