-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 153
License the whole rustc-perf
repository under the MIT license
#1933
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
Comments
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
7 similar comments
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license all my past contributions to the (I don't think it makes sense for me to make statements about future contributions now, and I don't see how that is relevant for this licensing issue.) |
I license past and future contributions to the |
2 similar comments
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the rust-lang/rustc-perf repository 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 to the rust-lang/rustc-perf repository under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions to the |
3 similar comments
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the rust-lang/rustc-perf repository under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions to the |
... good luck. I license all my past contributions to the rust-lang/rustc-perf repository under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license all my past contributions to the rust-lang/rustc-perf repository under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I think I don't need to make any licensing explicit on my end since my only contribution was a typo fix in a perf. triage report 😄 but anyways I license past and future contributions to the rust-lang/rustc-perf repository under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option. |
I license past and future contributions to the |
2 similar comments
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
I license past and future contributions to the |
1 similar comment
I license past and future contributions to the |
So, we got The last remaining contributor who didn't express their approval yet, @Horki, contributed code that was since deleted and is no longer a part of this repository. Therefore I think that we should be good with moving forward with the licensing. |
A top-level MIT license has been added: #1881. |
This repository currently does not have a top-level LICENSE file (#1880), which means that not all of its code is covered by a license.
We would like to license the whole
rustc-perf
repository (apart from thecollector/compile-benchmarks
directory, which has its own licenses) under the MIT License, to make it easier to userustc-perf
inrustc
source distributions. In the future, we might want to extend this license to MIT/Apache 2.0 (although currently we're aiming at MIT, as a start, since it is easier), hence we would like to ask the contributors to agree with a dual MIT/Apache 2.0 license, as a sort of future-proofing.To do that, we need contributors that made commits to this repository (with some caveats, see below) to agree by posting a comment stating their approval to this issue. Please see instructions at the bottom of this issue if you are mentioned in the list below. I will try to also contact the contributors individually.
How did we select the list of contributors from whom we need the approval?
I analyzed the commits from
rustc-perf
going all the way back toe99853d4777a1df001853c619eead0c891c28488
. In this commit, there was a top-level MIT license at the root of the repository, therefore all earlier commits should be MIT licensed. Then I found a set of contributors that made at least a single commit to any other directory thancollector
andsite
, because these two were already MIT licensed.I used this script for performing the analysis.
Related issues: #1880, #1927
PR with the new license: #1881
Checkoff
To agree to the licensing terms, please comment with the following text on this issue (you can copy the text using the copy button on the right):
Thank you very much!
Affected contributors:
@Horki(their code is no longer in this repository)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: