A free software license

There are many free software licenses available these days, from viral and stringent licenses like GPL, with some grey and confusing like LGPL to business friendly licenses like ASL and X11. All of these licenses are “open source”, which means the software source is also available to public along with its binaries. Which is great for open source and I personally like ASL among the lot and tend to use it for most of my open source software. But sometimes you might feel that these licenses are not “free” enough, and pack tons of terms and conditions in a pretty complicated language. There should be a software specific license which doesn’t restrict the user in anyway and allows to freely use, modify and distribute the software in any way the user likes. And the derived work should be allowed for both commercial and personal use, with or without a charge.

Now with the above situation in mind and as a developer of free software, here is my attempt to create a re-usable free software license. Lets call it, for obvious reasons, The Free Software License (TFSL). I must also mention that this license is inspired from GPL, ASL and WTF licenses and I have borrowed a few things from them. This license is also DRM-free and is composed of the following three important things:

  1. Terms of use
  2. Warranty
  3. Liability

I think these three things explain fully how the software should be used and also protects the developer/vendor from any damages inured from the use of the software. This license also makes sure that the software, licensed under TFSL, is distributed for free.

Version 1, April 2011

Copyright (C) 2011 Kamran Zafar <kamran@kamranzafar.org>

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modified copies of this license document, and changing is allowed as long as the name is changed.


0. You can use, modify, reproduce and distribute the software and any of its components in any way you want.
1. The software is available on “AS IS” basis and comes with absolutely NO warranty, either express or implied, to the extent permitted by applicable law.
2. In any event and under any legal theory, the copyright owner of the software will NOT be liable for any direct or in-direct damages incurred by the existence or the use of the software.

This “free software license” is available for free and can be used by any software vendor to distribute software as long as it meets the terms and conditions outlined in it’s text. In order to apply this license to the software, each source file of the software MUST contain the following wording.

Copyright [year] [name of copyright owner]

This program is a free software and comes with absolutely no warranty. You can use, modify, reproduce and distribute this software under the terms and conditions of The Free Software License.

You can obtain the copy of The Free Software License at


Now like I said, it is just an attempt to create such a free software license and I am sure this is not perfect but it can be modified as per vendor requirements. This license is also available for download here.

Why is git better than svn

Well I am not going to start debating over this question, as most people on the web are doing so. I am not going to list pros and cons of both svn and git and make a vague conclusion in the end. I being a user of both svn and git, found git better for the kind of work I do and the way I do it. I was mainly a svn user before I heard people talking about git being easier etc. than svn; after I started using git I agree with these people. With git, it is much easier, simpler, faster and natural(in the realm of development) to manage your code, to create and clone repos; branch, tag and merge code. Apart from being simple and powerful, git is also decentralized and distributed in nature, which undoubtedly is git’s main advantage over svn.

Now I found git better because I no-longer have to think about problems and limitations associated with svnsync; with git I can clone my repositories, pull and push my changes from anywhere in the world. In fact git allows ubiquitous transactions, so one doesn’t have to be connected to the main repo (as in svn) to check in changes. One also doesn’t have to remember branch or tag locations like with svn. I sometimes work while I am traveling, when I am in a different city or country; so now, with git, I don’t have to care from where in the world I am pushing files to which mirror of which repository; in other words I won’t indulge myself in the master-slave repo setups like in svn, in git every clone of a repo is truly “equal”, master and slave at the same time. Security is one area where git needs to focus on more, because it is decentralized; but the current asymmetric encryption for all transactions seem to suffice.

There are many other things one can talk about, there are pros and cons of both SCMs. But in the end I would say that gradually people should try and move away from a centralized repo to a more distributed SCM because of many advantages, some of which are described above.