Those are minor details. And 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. P.S.: by making source world-readable I was referring to unix permissions, which would of course only have an effect for people with toolserver accounts.

On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 9:21 PM, K. Peachey <p858snake(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote: All users can request SVN repositories. git and hg are installed too, and it's easy to set those up yourself via HTTP. However, this isn't enough, because users won't bother committing all their files to the repositories all the time, and the committed copy will become outdated.

@Eusebius: 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: 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. This whole discussion is not about redistribution, it is about developers being able to pick up and rescue abandoned tools. If you read my initial proposal carefully (well actually just read it at all), you'll see that I proposed just that.