Skip to content

Conversation

@pxrl
Copy link
Contributor

@pxrl pxrl commented Feb 10, 2025

Licensing these as BUSL can create confusion and potential legal ambiguity for third-parties who are simply trying to integrate existing deployments that are operated under the Across protocol.

I optimistically selected MIT because it puts minimal obligations on integrators, but another license might be preferred.

Licensing these as BUSL can create confusion and potential legal
ambiguity for third-parties who are simply trying to integrate existing
deployments that are operated under the Across protocol.
@pxrl pxrl merged commit 696bca1 into master Feb 27, 2025
9 checks passed
@pxrl pxrl deleted the pxrl/relicense branch February 27, 2025 12:20
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants