Re-license js-ipfs to MIT + Apache 2 #2624

alanshaw · 2019-11-22T16:18:14Z

@ianjdarrow has done some research into open-source licensing and determined that dual-licensing as MIT and Apache 2 is a best practice. Quoting from his writing elsewhere:

This has two major benefits:

There are concerns in the open source community about whether the MIT license leaves users vulnerable to patent infringement claims. We think the pure legal risk is small, but the way the open source community interacts with our project is really important. It makes sense to pick the license that makes the largest number of people comfortable.

There's now no reason to adopt a separate DCO, since the Apache-2 license grant addresses the same issue.

Why use a dual license, instead of just Apache-2? The Apache-2 license is incompatible with the GPLv2 license, which includes things like the Linux kernel. With a dual license, GPLv2 projects can just use the MIT license instead. Our goal is to make our software available to as many projects as possible, so we'd rather adopt a licensing scheme that doesn't exclude anyone.

What we need to do:

The licences are being updated in #2620, the next step is to get an explicit OK from our current and past contributors to consent to the relicensing. To keep track of things, below is a contributor sign-off list. Contributors can either check the box next to their github handle, or comment on this issue thread with the following text:

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Contributor sign-off:

mkg20001 · 2019-11-22T16:21:06Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

daviddias · 2019-11-22T16:22:13Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

0x-r4bbit · 2019-11-22T16:24:51Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

@ianjdarrow

@ianjdarrow has done some research into open-source licensing and determined that dual-licensing as MIT and Apache 2 is a best practice. Quoting from his writing elsewhere: > This has two major benefits: > - There are concerns in the open source community about whether the MIT license leaves users vulnerable to patent infringement claims. We think the pure legal risk is small, but the way the open source community interacts with our project is really important. It makes sense to pick the license that makes the largest number of people comfortable. > - There's now no reason to adopt a separate DCO, since the Apache-2 license grant addresses the same issue. > > Why use a dual license, instead of just Apache-2? The Apache-2 license is incompatible with the GPLv2 license, which includes things like the Linux kernel. With a dual license, GPLv2 projects can just use the MIT license instead. Our goal is to make our software available to as many projects as possible, so we'd rather adopt a licensing scheme that doesn't exclude anyone. ### What we need to do: The licences are being updated in #2620, the next step is to get an explicit OK from our current and past contributors to consent to the relicensing. Please give consent here: #2624

vasco-santos · 2019-11-22T16:35:56Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

wraithgar · 2019-11-22T16:37:32Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

RichardLitt · 2019-11-22T17:18:30Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

hackergrrl · 2019-11-22T17:29:59Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

MicrowaveDev · 2019-11-22T17:45:27Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

andrew · 2019-11-22T19:44:29Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

fsdiogo · 2019-11-22T20:15:39Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

davidgilbertson · 2019-11-22T22:01:29Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

grassias · 2019-11-22T22:15:45Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

lidel · 2019-11-23T00:44:36Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

rasmuserik · 2019-11-23T07:26:11Z

I license past and future contributions to js-ipfs under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

victorb · 2019-11-23T08:20:00Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

…

On Sat, Nov 23, 2019, 08:26 RasmusErik Voel Jensen ***@***.***> wrote: I license past and future contributions to js-ipfs under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2624?email_source=notifications&email_token=AADQH5DQTJ72G6LH6G7K5GDQVDLJLA5CNFSM4JQS6HJKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEE7PQTQ#issuecomment-557774926>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADQH5FV7NNZSMAR76JICKDQVDLJLANCNFSM4JQS6HJA> .

dbachko · 2019-11-23T16:00:33Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Gozala · 2019-11-23T18:26:43Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

pgte · 2019-11-24T11:02:22Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

niinpatel · 2019-11-24T14:20:27Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

achingbrain · 2019-11-24T19:24:43Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

kenshyx · 2019-11-25T08:34:08Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

vmx · 2019-11-25T13:19:16Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

PedroMiguelSS · 2019-11-25T16:11:21Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

hacdias · 2019-11-25T17:52:06Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

enricomarino · 2019-11-25T21:57:34Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

alanshaw · 2019-11-26T09:04:11Z

js-ipfs is being re-licensed to MIT+Apache2 and we need your sign off. Please read the info and either check the box next to your github handle, or comment on this issue thread with the following text:

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Mentioning these people here who did not get a notification in the original list due to github limiting mentions to <= 50:

@momack2, @pkafei, @Prabhakar-Poudel, @raoulmillais, @terichadbourne, @atvanguard, @0xflotus, @Otto-AA, @AuHau, @anorth, @satazor, @parkan, @bmordan, @bvand, @BrunoZell, @josselinchevalay, @caiogondim, @jchancehud, @chirag-shinde, @dfguo, @dordille, @nukemandan, @csuwildcat, @djoq, @sericaia, @dasilvacontin, @djdv, @faheel, @felixonmars, @grantlouisherman, @haoliangyu, @harshjv, @moshisushi, @leo6104, @iamruinous, @jessicaschilling, @sktt, @jonschlinkert, @JonKrone, @Jorropo, @joaosantos15, @xizhao, @lgierth, @LukasDrgon, @mboperator, @aphelionz, @machawk1, @mishmosh, @pvsmounish, @My9Bot

alanshaw · 2019-11-26T09:04:26Z

js-ipfs is being re-licensed to MIT+Apache2 and we need your sign off. Please read the info and either check the box next to your github handle, or comment on this issue thread with the following text:

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Mentioning these people here who did not get a notification in the original list due to github limiting mentions to <= 50:

@nick, @nunofmn, @raksooo, @masylum, @Qmstream, @rodkeys, @tpae, @jurglic, @vincepmartin, @yxliang01, @ult-yole, @bitspill, @datafatmunger, @hapsody, @jonahweissman, @kevingzhang, @reasv, @robbsolter, @seungwon-kang, @swedneck, @thisconnect, @magik6k, @negamaxi

rodkeys · 2019-11-26T19:52:32Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

felixonmars · 2019-11-26T19:53:28Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

BrunoZell · 2019-11-27T04:39:22Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

magik6k · 2019-11-27T10:24:57Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

aphelionz · 2019-11-27T15:45:33Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

reasv · 2019-11-27T17:26:26Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

mikeal · 2019-11-27T17:58:32Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Mr0grog · 2019-11-27T18:42:27Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

negamaxi · 2019-11-27T18:46:33Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

sktt · 2019-11-28T12:38:19Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

jonahweissman · 2019-11-29T05:34:44Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

ya7ya · 2019-11-29T08:12:23Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

bvand · 2019-11-29T20:12:03Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

terichadbourne · 2019-12-03T17:46:21Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Prabhakar-Poudel · 2019-12-04T03:58:33Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Prabhakar-Poudel · 2019-12-04T03:58:49Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

dignifiedquire · 2019-12-04T11:36:54Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

pvsmounish · 2019-12-04T12:12:16Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

My9Bot · 2019-12-04T15:44:50Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

parkan · 2019-12-05T18:28:32Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

JonKrone · 2020-04-04T16:54:26Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

SgtPooki · 2023-05-25T23:57:21Z

js-ipfs is being deprecated in favor of Helia. You can learn more about this deprecation and read the migration guide.

Please feel to reopen with any comments by 2023-06-02. We will do a final pass on reopened issues afterwards (see #4336).

@achingbrain @BigLep you two might want to peek at this

alanshaw added status/in-progress In progress help wanted Seeking public contribution on this issue labels Nov 22, 2019

alanshaw mentioned this issue Nov 27, 2019

docs: remove not used sections ipfs/community#383

Closed

This was referenced Feb 20, 2020

switch licenses to mit-apl ipld/libipld#13

Merged

switch license from isc to mit/apl2.0 rs-ipfs/rust-ipfs#50

Merged

ethers mentioned this issue Aug 5, 2020

Port Solidity deposit contract to this repo ethereum/consensus-specs#1968

Closed

5 tasks

carsonfarmer mentioned this issue Nov 8, 2022

bump and publish version 0.0.1 tablelandnetwork/local-tableland#88

Merged

SgtPooki self-assigned this May 17, 2023

SgtPooki closed this as completed May 25, 2023

SgtPooki added the kind/wontfix-migration-available label May 25, 2023

Re-license js-ipfs to MIT + Apache 2 #2624

Re-license js-ipfs to MIT + Apache 2 #2624

Comments

alanshaw commented Nov 22, 2019 • edited

What we need to do:

Contributor sign-off:

mkg20001 commented Nov 22, 2019

daviddias commented Nov 22, 2019

0x-r4bbit commented Nov 22, 2019

vasco-santos commented Nov 22, 2019

wraithgar commented Nov 22, 2019

RichardLitt commented Nov 22, 2019

hackergrrl commented Nov 22, 2019

MicrowaveDev commented Nov 22, 2019

andrew commented Nov 22, 2019

fsdiogo commented Nov 22, 2019

davidgilbertson commented Nov 22, 2019

grassias commented Nov 22, 2019

lidel commented Nov 23, 2019

rasmuserik commented Nov 23, 2019

victorb commented Nov 23, 2019 via email

dbachko commented Nov 23, 2019

Gozala commented Nov 23, 2019

pgte commented Nov 24, 2019

niinpatel commented Nov 24, 2019

achingbrain commented Nov 24, 2019

kenshyx commented Nov 25, 2019

vmx commented Nov 25, 2019

PedroMiguelSS commented Nov 25, 2019

hacdias commented Nov 25, 2019

enricomarino commented Nov 25, 2019

alanshaw commented Nov 26, 2019

alanshaw commented Nov 26, 2019

rodkeys commented Nov 26, 2019

felixonmars commented Nov 26, 2019

BrunoZell commented Nov 27, 2019

magik6k commented Nov 27, 2019

aphelionz commented Nov 27, 2019

reasv commented Nov 27, 2019

mikeal commented Nov 27, 2019

Mr0grog commented Nov 27, 2019

negamaxi commented Nov 27, 2019

sktt commented Nov 28, 2019

jonahweissman commented Nov 29, 2019

ya7ya commented Nov 29, 2019

bvand commented Nov 29, 2019

terichadbourne commented Dec 3, 2019

Prabhakar-Poudel commented Dec 4, 2019

Prabhakar-Poudel commented Dec 4, 2019

dignifiedquire commented Dec 4, 2019

pvsmounish commented Dec 4, 2019

My9Bot commented Dec 4, 2019

parkan commented Dec 5, 2019

JonKrone commented Apr 4, 2020

SgtPooki commented May 25, 2023

alanshaw commented Nov 22, 2019 •

edited