@Eusebius:
I would dare guessing that for most of the users it would make pretty much zero difference which free license (FSF approved) the choose for their projects.
viral/nonviral could be a significant difference to some developers. Guillaume
I don't really see how even this is significant. It's not like any of the tools on the TS, which are all pretty specialized niche programs, would be interesting for derivative works or inclusion in commercial software.
@Pathoschild:
requests nor collects user credentials; users provide temporary access directly to me, knowing the risks of doing so. The Toolserver is
That looks like word play to me. You are proceccessing Wikimedia account details on the toolserver (I'm assuming you use centralauth token and session cookies? Just as bad.). That's all that matters to me.
The license indicates what freedoms the author intends for his tools. It makes no sense to license a tool for redistribution if you don't want it redistributed.
This whole discussion is not about redistribution, it is about developers being able to pick up and rescue abandoned tools.
Trust between Toolserver users is irrelevant here, since home directories are not world-readable.
If you read my initial proposal carefully (well actually just read it at all), you'll see that I proposed just that.