Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

GPL is not a good choice of license for library code #34

Closed
bearbin opened this issue Jun 17, 2020 · 14 comments
Closed

GPL is not a good choice of license for library code #34

bearbin opened this issue Jun 17, 2020 · 14 comments

Comments

@bearbin
Copy link

bearbin commented Jun 17, 2020

There has been some interest in including cubiomes as one biome generator option for the cuberite minecraft-compatible gameserver project. Unfortunately cuberite is Apache and cubiomes GPL, so cubiomes support cannot be included in cuberite.

If being included in free minecraft-compatible server software is something this project is interested in, it would be a good idea to consider changing the license. Most server projects are Apache or MIT licensed rather than GPL.

@Titaniumtown
Copy link

Apache is a pretty good license

@Titaniumtown
Copy link

or BSD

@Cubitect
Copy link
Owner

I agree that GPLv3 was a poor choice here. When I started this project it seemed a very popular license, but I should have used at least LGPL and I was planning to make use of the MIT license for my projects in the future (I believe that would be compatible with Apache as well). Unfortunately, it's difficult to change the license of a project that has contributions from multiple people. As far as I could determine everyone who made a significant contribution needs to agree to change the license before I can do so.

@Titaniumtown
Copy link

Yea, that's exactly what is needed. Maybe email everyone who has contributed? asking if a change of licenses would be ok with them. I also think that's it's everyone who has contributed (not just significant contributions) has to agree.

@Cubitect
Copy link
Owner

I don't have all the emails, but I'll at least make a post here @-ing everyone, which will be good as a record as well.

@Titaniumtown
Copy link

good idea

@Cubitect
Copy link
Owner

Would all of you be willing to change the license of cubiomes (to MIT)?
@fwiffo @Earthcomputer @JeWe37 @kbinani @Badel2

@JeWe37
Copy link
Contributor

JeWe37 commented Jun 22, 2020

Absolutely, I personally prefer MIT anyway. Never liked the copyleft requirment.

@Cubitect Cubitect pinned this issue Jun 22, 2020
@fwiffo
Copy link
Contributor

fwiffo commented Jun 22, 2020 via email

@Earthcomputer
Copy link
Contributor

I, Earthcomputer, agree to licence cubiomes and my contributions to it under MIT licence.

@kbinani
Copy link
Contributor

kbinani commented Jun 23, 2020

@Cubitect I agree to re-licensing of my contributions, including active pull request #29.

I prefer MIT, but I'll follow the owner's choice.

@Cubitect
Copy link
Owner

So everyone who has commited to the repo, except for Badel2, has replied and is in favor to change the license from GPLv3 to MIT. Given that Badel2 has only contributed a range-checking fix for a single source line, that I have since rewritten anyway, I think I can go ahead with the license change.

@Titaniumtown
Copy link

Yay!

Cubitect added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 26, 2020
We have decided (#34) to re-license cubiomes under the MIT License.
Cubitect added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 26, 2020
No longer needed after re-licensing cubiomes under the MIT License (#34).
@Badel2
Copy link
Contributor

Badel2 commented Jun 26, 2020

I also agree to re-license my commit to MIT. It's nice to see some movement around here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

8 participants