Relicense Krypton under LGPL v3#26
Conversation
Esophose
left a comment
Esophose
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds fine to me, you have my permission to relicense my contributions under LGPL 3.0.
conclube
left a comment
conclube
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I personally prefer MIT, it would give me the ability to use code easier from Krypton.
This is why the API remains licensed under MIT, and the server is licensed under LGPL to allow you to depend on it in a project under your own terms, only derivative works require the use of the same license. |
Okay good, just make sure the API is rich and good then pog. |
conclube
left a comment
conclube
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So henceforth I approve this albeit I haven't contributed yet.
|
Who is gonna fork the API without making some sort of server modifications...? Why split the licenses. Decide on 1 and stick with it |
It is not that hard to understand how it works. Velocity did the same split licensing, and people supported their decision just fine. And dual licensing is fine. |
|
The license on the server is to protect the part that I put the most effort in to, and the part that I care the most about. The API is useless without the server, which is why I am perfectly content with it being stolen, resold, or anything else. The server on the other hand, it would kill me to see my hours and hours of work released free of charge be resold by someone who does not even contribute to their fork, let alone contributing back to the upstream project. I want to protect my code against what has happened to Spigot, where proprietary forks are being resold on MC Market with most of the time little to no actual good changes. |
|
I have the explicit permission of both @knightzmc and @PulseBeat02 to relicense their contributions under the terms of the GNU General Public License, which is what I will be relicensing Krypton under, as the GNU Lesser General Public License does not protect the project enough to align with the values that I outlined for the reasons as to why I am relicensing in the first place. |
4 participants
As you can tell by the title, I have decided to relicense Krypton under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0.
The primary reason for this change is that I believe it will better benefit the project, and that it closer agrees with my values, in that I would much rather not see my hours and hours of hard work and effort be rebranded and sold on by someone who has contributed nothing to the project. These what I will call here "leechers" are sins to the open-source world, and I want to avoid this happening to this project.
If you are one of the contributors to this project (@knightzmc , @Esophose and @PulseBeat02 ), and you would not mind me relicensing your contributions under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License, please do so by making it clear in writing that you are in fact okay with this. Something as simple as "I give you my explicit permission to re-license my contributed code under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License 3.0" is satisfactory for this.
Just to be explicitly clear, only the server side of Krypton is being relicensed. The API will remain under the same MIT license, with the addition of license headers.