-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 780
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
Consider relicensing under MIT/Apache-2.0 #105
Comments
To be honest, I haven't fully understood dual licensing. If I understand correctly, it means that users of the software can choose between the two licenses. MIT is more permissive than Apache-2.0 (due to the absence of patent clauses), so will the software still be protected from patent litigations if it is dual licensed? If not, what is the advantage of dual-licensing with Apache-2.0? |
I am no means an expert when it comes to licenses and legal issues, but yes, as you stated it means that the users of the software can choose between the two licenses. If Of course this change would require that every contributor of this project agrees that their contributions can be relicensed and that could be cumbersome. |
Thank you for the clarification. In this case, I'm open to relicensing fd under MIT/Apache-2.0. Would you be willing to organize the necessary steps (have all contributors sign, add the new license, modify Cargo file, etc.)? |
I'll also add that I support the decision. |
Absolutely. Contributor checkoffIf you agree to relicense, please leave the following comment to this issue:
|
I think it's best to be explicit (even though I did check some checkboxes already), so here's mine: I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.
|
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
3 similar comments
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0
license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.
|
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
1 similar comment
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. 68a85c7 🤣 |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
@jcpetkovich @deg4uss3r @sebasv @pickfire Could you please (also) sign this (if you agree)? |
Sorry for the delay.
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0
license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.
…On Oct 19, 2017 2:35 PM, "David Peter" ***@***.***> wrote:
@jcpetkovich <https://github.com/jcpetkovich> @deg4uss3r
<https://github.com/deg4uss3r> @sebasv <https://github.com/sebasv>
@pickfire <https://github.com/pickfire> Could you please (also) sign this
(if you agree)?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#105 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJuGT79hC4LhlDcH5SPXTb9nzo5flUbks5st5ZZgaJpZM4P3_xr>
.
|
My apologies for the delayed response as well. I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
2 similar comments
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
@Detegr All done 😄 |
Great, I'll prepare a PR. We're missing @goyox86 though (and a couple of others that are mainly README fixes, so I'm not sure if those are important). I'll prepare the PR anyway so we can merge it quickly before other contributors join the project 😄. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
ping @mehandes (for the sake of completeness:) |
Some time ago, there were requests that MIT or Apache-2.0 licensed Rust projects would be relicensed under MIT/Apache-2.0 dual license, see here.
Please consider if this would be acceptable for this project as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: