Hacker News Reader

I prefer zlib or boost licenses which make a distinction for binaries. You don't have to attach the license for binary-only applications which makes it more suited in some cases (like embedded development).

View on HN

I second zlib. It's slightly more restrictive than MIT, but in a very sensible way. I don't think preventing modified sources from masquerading as the original Arc, or maintaining author attribution will impede adoption overly much.

Pardon my naivete, but are masquerading languages a common problem?

Choosing a license to fight imagined evils seems like the short route to a DRM'd license.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com