-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
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
change license to MIT? #40
Comments
Ok, let's do it. There are only few contributors, all of them with only 1 commit, all with less than 10 lines, which the GNU project (typically strict in this regard) wouldn't even consider legally significant for copyright purposes. Current contributors:
If you've been tagged, do you agree to change the license terms of this package from LGPL to MIT? |
Yes, I agree |
I agree as well. Although, in fairness, my contribution is non-substantial (automated PR bumping a version cap in CI config) and has since been removed, so I don't think I actually have any copyright claim here. |
I agree.
…On Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 04:45 Morten Piibeleht ***@***.***> wrote:
I agree as well. Although, in fairness, my contribution is non-substantial
(automated PR bumping a version cap in CI config) and has since been
removed, so I don't think I actually have any copyright claim here.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#40 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANBZ52MYINZS5A7LME3CNTV57TEBANCNFSM6AAAAAAQG524II>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
I agree as well. |
I was looking for LGPL packages, suspecting that there should not be many since for a Julia package there's no such thing as "linking" making LGPL equivalent to GPL. I found this package, which appears to be LGPL because it's a wrapper around an LGPL library (which is dynamically linked, so that makes sense). Wrapper code need not have the same license as the wrapped library, so this package could and arguably should be MIT licensed. As it stands, whereas Cuba can be used with/by non-open source software so long as modifications to Cuba are released in accordance with the LGPL, Cuba.jl cannot be used with/by non-open source software, which I don't think was the intention. Since there are still relatively few contributors, getting permission for a license change should be tractable.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: