-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17.5k
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
x/pkgsite: GPL3 considered a "permissive license" #43758
Comments
cc @julieqiu |
A better term to describe what the pkgsite cares about might be "redistributable license". |
/cc @jba |
"Redistributable" is the word we use internally, but we worried that it might sound too legalistic. But I suppose that is the right term, so we should use it. |
For the sake of keeping the language simple, how about "Can be distributed" or "Can be distributed freely"? Or "Allows distribution". |
@jba This should be closed as it wasn't done automatically by golang/pkgsite@5b39ce4 due to a small misspelling. |
We went with "redistributable." We can always change later. |
Great, thanks all. I think "redistributable" is clear enough. |
…sive" For golang/go#43758 Change-Id: I322b7f44dba96e881d7b2e49fef9dcde71fbd65b X-GoDev-Commit: 176f5808de6b97eea3d4b04dedb421ac8ab03857
I have several packages licensed under GPLv3, which is correctly detected by pkg.go.dev. However I noticed today that in the "details" bar on the right one of the features described is "permissive license". Normally that's a term used for non-copyleft licenses like ISC. An example page where this is the case would be this: https://pkg.go.dev/rescribe.xyz/preproc
In https://pkg.go.dev/about#best-practices-h2 it states that "For more information on how pkg.go.dev determines if a license is permissive, see our license policy", linking to https://pkg.go.dev/license-policy, but that only seems to detail how licenses are detected (which is done correctly in this case), not how "permissive license" is determined.
I think copyleft licensed projects should not be tagged with "permissive license", and ideally tagged "copyleft license" instead, in the details box.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: