-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
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
Adjust licensing to declared project license #711
Adjust licensing to declared project license #711
Conversation
8fff0cd
to
98b8759
Compare
@bhamail you handled the last license adjustment, could you have a look at this please? Basicly every source file (outside libffi source) either gained the LGPL2.1+AL2.0 header or the existing header was adjusted to match that. @twall Could you please have a look at the only functional change: I replaced the copied WeakIdentityHashMap with WeakMemoryHolder, that is a minimal implementation of the used function set. The primary concern of #252 is addressed by this, the two secondary points:
|
One thing I just noticed - the file headers I see mention LGPL 2.1 or (at your opinion) any later version.. So my question: Is the reduction to LGPL2.1 intended? If not I'll rework this to be reflected. |
98b8759
to
41afeb4
Compare
41afeb4
to
238169d
Compare
@bhamail @dblock @twall Summary: This is in contrast to LICENSE, which only speaks about LGPL 2.1 and AL 2.0, but drops the "or later" part of the LGPL wording in README.md. The source code files then contradict this by one being licensed under LGPL 2.1 or later. In addition source code that is licensed under pure AL 2.0 was copied into the tree (WeakIdentityHashMap). So to clear this up:
|
This looks acceptable to me. |
I vote 👍 too. @twall I think this is your call to hit merge |
I merged the changes into master - thank you for checking and chiming in. |
Adjust licensing to declared project license (followup for PR #711)
Adjust licensing to declared project license (followup for PR #711)
java-native-access#711) …tail of Quiche Motivation: Our usage of quiche is an implementation detail so we should not leak it to the user. We should convert from quiche errors to errors that are defined in the RFC9000. Modifications: Remove QuicheError from public API and replace it by QuicTransportError. Result: Cleaner API without leaking implementation details
Closes: #252