Choosing SW license about data-driven-dynamics HOT 9 CLOSED

Anyways I will make a new branch so we do not have the GPL in the commit history.

from data-driven-dynamics.

@manumerous I tend to label most of my work as BSD, since I care more about my work being used than gaining credit for it. If you care more about acknowledgement, maybe Apache is a better license.

If this is okay for you, probably BSD is a good license for our purpose (also easier to move into PX4).

from data-driven-dynamics.

I think BSD is okay. Currently my name is anyways mentioned as the author in every file and it will also be shown in the commit history what i did. I guess that should be acknowledgement enough. :)

from data-driven-dynamics.

@manumerous Lets keep this open until we resolve the license issue on this repo 😄

from data-driven-dynamics.

@manumerous Note that the FW Dynamics Plugin is a Apache licensed code, so this repo is already kind of apache licensed

https://github.com/Jaeyoung-Lim/data-driven-dynamics/blob/8784b0fdfebc4efe9dfc513817c0320303f275a3/src/gazebo_fw_dynamics_plugin.cpp#L1-L15

from data-driven-dynamics.

Thanks for pointing this out and reopening the Issue. I added my files for now under the BSD license. I guess it should not be a problem if we change this later? Or should there never be other licenses in the commit history?

from data-driven-dynamics.

@manumerous Since this repo has never been distributed I think the commit history doesn't really matter.

We own the code, so we can change the license as we want. (Except for the FWDynamicsPlugin code)
Some people squash all the commit history when they release the work as a workaround, so something to think about later 😉

from data-driven-dynamics.

Okay thank you for your insights!

from data-driven-dynamics.

@manumerous Closing since I believe this has been resolved

from data-driven-dynamics.