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

Consider relicensing under MIT/Apache-2.0 #105

Closed
Detegr opened this issue Oct 13, 2017 · 29 comments
Closed

Consider relicensing under MIT/Apache-2.0 #105

Detegr opened this issue Oct 13, 2017 · 29 comments
Labels

Comments

@Detegr
Copy link
Contributor

Detegr commented Oct 13, 2017

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.

@sharkdp
Copy link
Owner

sharkdp commented Oct 13, 2017

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?

@Detegr
Copy link
Contributor Author

Detegr commented Oct 13, 2017

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 fd would be shipped within a project, the project could choose between MIT and Apache 2. This in turn gives more freedom to the user because it can be easier for the user to choose the more strict license (for example to omit copying the copyright statements that MIT requires).

Of course this change would require that every contributor of this project agrees that their contributions can be relicensed and that could be cumbersome.

@sharkdp
Copy link
Owner

sharkdp commented Oct 13, 2017

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.)?

@mmstick
Copy link
Contributor

mmstick commented Oct 14, 2017

I'll also add that I support the decision.

@Detegr
Copy link
Contributor Author

Detegr commented Oct 15, 2017

Would you be willing to organize the necessary steps (have all contributors sign, add the new license, modify Cargo file, etc.)?

Absolutely.

Contributor checkoff

If you agree to relicense, please leave the following comment to this issue:

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

@Detegr
Copy link
Contributor Author

Detegr commented Oct 15, 2017

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.

@wezm
Copy link
Contributor

wezm commented Oct 15, 2017

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

@jakwings
Copy link
Contributor

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Project: https://github.com/sharkdp/fd
Signer: J.W <jakwings@gmail.com>

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

@sharkdp
Copy link
Owner

sharkdp commented Oct 15, 2017

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
@reima
Copy link
Contributor

reima commented Oct 15, 2017

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

@michaelmior
Copy link
Contributor

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

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Oct 15, 2017

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

@abaez
Copy link
Contributor

abaez commented Oct 15, 2017 via email

@gsquire
Copy link
Contributor

gsquire commented Oct 15, 2017

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
@unsignedint
Copy link
Contributor

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

@olalonde
Copy link
Contributor

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

68a85c7 🤣

@Knugel
Copy link
Contributor

Knugel commented Oct 16, 2017

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

@sharkdp
Copy link
Owner

sharkdp commented Oct 19, 2017

@jcpetkovich @deg4uss3r @sebasv @pickfire Could you please (also) sign this (if you agree)?

@jcpetkovich
Copy link
Contributor

jcpetkovich commented Oct 19, 2017 via email

@sebasv
Copy link
Contributor

sebasv commented Oct 20, 2017

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.

@matematikaadit
Copy link
Contributor

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
@pickfire
Copy link
Contributor

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

@deg4uss3r
Copy link
Contributor

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

@sharkdp
Copy link
Owner

sharkdp commented Oct 21, 2017

@Detegr All done 😄

@Detegr
Copy link
Contributor Author

Detegr commented Oct 21, 2017

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 😄.

@goyox86
Copy link
Contributor

goyox86 commented Oct 21, 2017

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

@Detegr
Copy link
Contributor Author

Detegr commented Oct 21, 2017

PR is ready, agreement from @cassava and @mehandes (README changes for both of them) are missing.

@sharkdp I would suggest you won't merge any PR's before merging #143 unless the authors are aware of the ongoing relicensing effort.

@sharkdp sharkdp closed this as completed Oct 22, 2017
@cassava
Copy link
Contributor

cassava commented Oct 23, 2017

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

@sskras
Copy link

sskras commented Dec 15, 2018

ping @mehandes (for the sake of completeness:)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests