Leaderboard

0-BSD is the only OSI-certified license that gives the same level of restrictions as Public Domain, while still, as you well know from those other presentations you referred to, being recognized in (almost) all countries. Public domain and The Unlicense are not recognized universally. Like Shaun points out, the biggest worry is that someone can claim my work as theirs because the license is open enough that you can copy any part, or the whole, without attribution. Honestly, I don't think the prospect of someone claiming I cheated would meet any level of credibility, since all the development is done in a 3rd-party public repository and I never squash my commits. Easy to prove I went through the development process and I couldn't temper with the commit hashes/timestamps of those commits. You can see all the mistakes, dead-ends, reworks, fixes... Anyway, whether or not you use a more restrictive license would not prevent someone from falsely claiming their work predates yours. If that were to happen, I trust the LabVIEW Community will hold the reputation of the original developer. If the work you want to release is owned by a company, I would recommend to not use 0-BSD. Make sure there is at least an attribution clause.

It's because your indicator has the string as the last element in the cluster, not the first. If you change your Bundle function to have the string as the 3rd element wired in instead of the 1st, the wiring will work. I suggest you review the topic of Type Definitions in LabVIEW, where you can define a data type like a cluster in a single location, and use that type definition in all places in your code where you need that type. It helps you avoid situations like the one you describe.

I work for NI now!