I’m considering putting a project[1] on strictEq, and I’d like to offer waivers/freebies as was possible in LicenseZero. Is it easiest to issue freebie licenses outside of strictEq as per the “Not Exclusive” clause of the strictEq agency terms?
[1] a TUI that helps write conventional commits. It’s useful in my day-to-day and was fun to build. It seems like the kind of thing I wouldn’t mind sharing with programmers and charging businesses for.
@kalt.steven, glad to hear from you! I’d be happy to have your project on sEq. Link us to a repo, so we can take a peak?
In terms of licensing, there’s nothing to stop you giving out freebie licenses if you like. Depending on who the user is, and the requirements of their company if they have one, you might use the indieopensource.com paid license form, or hack up sEq’s own form, to remove all the bits about agency and whatnot. If it’s more of a casual freebie, you might just give them permission by e-mail.
Feature-wise, freebies aren’t currently something sEq automates in any way. They’re not incompatible with using sEq to sell licenses to other folks, but they’re not somehting sEq currently helps with.
I have it on my roadmap to give sellers some way to list companies on their pages if they do side deals, like company-wide site licenses. But for now, the only people who get listed as supporters on a project page are people who buy licenses through sEq.
If it’s more of a casual freebie, you might just give them permission by e-mail.
Alright, that’s what I was looking to confirm.
The repo is https://github.com/skalt/git-cc.
Happy to feature on sEq if you like!
Interesting project. I’m good friends with Ben Coe, who does a lot of Conventional Commit stuff, open source and at work.
Happy to feature on sEq if you like!
Sure! Note that I haven’t I registered the project with sEq yet since sEq’s SSL certificates expired: 
Ben Coe, who does a lot of Conventional Commit stuff
I’d love to get to the point where I can use Ben Coe’s work on conventional-changelog! My motivation for writing git-cc was to ship a TUI that would be accessible without node.js and to try out parser combinators and the bubbletea framework.
Thanks for letting me know about the certificate! That must have just gone down today.
It’s usually some small config error with certbot and nginx.
Would you recommend my LICENSE.md file contain sEq’s public license (https://stricteq.com/free/1.1.0)? Would it matter if my LICENSE.md contained a different license such as the Prosperity license?
Below are several questions that aren’t related to the discussion topic, freebies. If there’s a better place or format for these questions, please let me know.
git-cc since the form uses /^[a-z0-9]{3,16}$/ as an input validator. The error message, “Please match the requested format” would be more helpful if I didn’t have to inspect-element to find the requested format.I’d recommend that your LICENSE.md point to the standard deal page at https://stricteq.com/deal/1.3.0.
Unless you want to take back a license you’ve previously given, you don’t usually have to say anything about this, from a license point of view. However, if you’re anticipating changes, or want to warm folks up to the idea, I’d say mentioning your plans in LICENSE.md is a good idea.
Thanks for this.
The form should actually explain the criteria more clearly if you actually manage to submit the form with an invalid name. But as it is, if your browser supports the HTML5-style client-side validation, you’ll never get as far as submitting the form.
I’m taking a look at this now.
The project creation form now spells out all the project name criteria.
I finally got around to submitting the project to sEq. Thanks for your continued support and patience! One last UI/UX suggestion: when creating a project, associating a unit with the price input would be helpful.
Unit is USD! Fix deployed.
Just added gitcc to the showcase on the homepage.
I assume that GitHub is where most potential users are currently hosting their code, if not everything related to their projects.
Would it make sense to allow the same project name format as GitHub? For example, git-cc instead of gitcc.
Definitely open to that. I will try to find GitHub’s pattern.
Anybody know where to find the official criteria for GitHub user names and repo names?
I’m a little nervous about encouraging people to copy their GitHub user names. I don’t want to create a bunch of train wrecks where people can’t get “their name”, and I have to mediate the conflict. But I suppose that’s looking a long way forward.
I searched around on GitHub’s documentation, but didn’t find it there. I think the format for usernames and repository names was originally based on Unix usernames; alphanumeric ASCII, plus ., -, and _.
Using a ., -, or _ character between sets of alphanumeric ASCII seems pretty common. Allowing that is probably enough for the majority of users.
Looks like an old version of the GitHub sign-up page spelled out these criteria:
- Github username may only contain alphanumeric characters or hyphens.
- Github username cannot have multiple consecutive hyphens.
- Github username cannot begin or end with a hyphen.
- Maximum is 39 characters.
That’s for user names, rather than for repo names.