Skip to content
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

Add note about licensing to README.md #81

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 10, 2017

Conversation

Freso
Copy link
Member

@Freso Freso commented Feb 10, 2017

Picard itself is licensed under the GPLv2 which means that any plugins written specifically for Picard might be argued to be under GPLv2 themselves due to GPLv2's viral nature, either due to being derived from Picard to some extent, or due to linking to Picard at runtime.

To avoid any legal issues (and to make sure we have the rights to distribute and change plugins for the future) the added sentence declares that new plugins to the repository should be under a GPLv2-compatible license (ie., a license "more free" than GPLv2 is also acceptable).

Also, be declaring it as "new plugins" the statement is "grandfathering" plugins already in the repository. Ideally these plugins should eventually get sorted out (see also #5 ), but this should at least be something we can point new contributors to so we don't make the current license mess worse. :)

Picard itself is licensed under the GPLv2 which means that any plugins
written specifically for Picard might be argued to be under GPLv2
themselves due to GPLv2's viral nature, either due to being derived from
Picard to some extent, or due to linking to Picard at runtime.

To avoid any legal issues (and to make sure we have the rights to
distribute and change plugins for the future) the added sentence
declares that new plugins to the repository should be under a
GPLv2-compatible license (ie., a license "more free" than GPLv2 is also
acceptable).

Also, be declaring it as "new plugins" the statement is "grandfathering"
plugins already in the repository. Ideally these plugins should
eventually get sorted out (see also
metabrainz#5 ), but this should
at least be something we can point new contributors to so we don't make
the current license mess worse. :)
@sambhav sambhav merged commit bcac3fe into metabrainz:master Feb 10, 2017
@Freso Freso deleted the add-licensing-note-to-readme branch February 11, 2017 00:34
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.

2 participants