License Clarification

Discussion of the OCMock framework. If you have patches we would prefer you to send them to the mailing list, but attaching them to a topic is possible, too.

License Clarification

Postby subsymbolic » 18 Jun 2013, 20:34

I'm looking to use OCMock in a client project however I want to make sure I don't contravene the license.

  • Is including the license in the source and the "3rd party" section of our internal docs enough?
    OR
  • Do I also need to add an acknowledgement in the application UI? Sadly not something my client would be willing to do.

Thanks!
subsymbolic
 
Posts: 2
Joined: 18 Jun 2013, 20:23

Re: License Clarification

Postby erik » 19 Jun 2013, 16:25

My understanding of BSD-style licenses used for tools is that you don't have to mention anything in the product. The application you're writing doesn't directly use OCMock, right? Only its test suite does.

Trust me, if I could do it all over again, I'd use an Apache 2 license for OCMock. In fact, I've got some advice from the legal team at my employer (ThoughtWorks) about how to switch the license to Apache 2. It's not trivial but I'm still considering it.
erik
 
Posts: 90
Joined: 10 Oct 2009, 15:22
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: License Clarification

Postby subsymbolic » 20 Jun 2013, 00:33

erik wrote:My understanding of BSD-style licenses used for tools is that you don't have to mention anything in the product. The application you're writing doesn't directly use OCMock, right? Only its test suite does.

That's right, we'll just use it in our test suites. Somehow, I missed that this is a BSD-style license, I now feel like I can go ahead and use it. As for switching to Apache 2 one day, that would be nice :)

I've used OCMock in the past too and it's great. Big thank you for writing it!
subsymbolic
 
Posts: 2
Joined: 18 Jun 2013, 20:23


Return to OCMock