-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 85
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
Convert license to array of identifiers #312
Conversation
Does this indicate that we are all 3 licenses? I assume we can't represent |
I don't think it really is defined what the content of this field means, if that is just list or if there is any relation between the items. Therefore I have opened rubygems/rubygems#7355. However, there is other option:
But I am not sure if that is any better :/ Nevertheless, the intention of this PR is just to merely list all the licenses, which is good for practical purposes. I.e. if somebody installs this package, they knows there those licenses applies. Where and how, they would need to look around. But that is not different to the "MIT AND (BSD-2-Clause OR GPL-2.0-or-later)" string IMHO. |
Okay, makes sense. Let's see the conclusion of rubygems/rubygems#7355 and then move forward here. |
Perhaps for simplicity's sake you could relicense the whole thing as BSD, with permission from the original authors. |
I think it would be hard work: https://github.com/socketry/nio4r/blob/main/license.md |
I think it's okay to specify In our case, we have
If anyone has a problem with this interpretation, please let me know. The goal here is to make it easier for automated tools to analyse the license of this code. I think this is a reasonable middle ground, with the full details being outlined in |
RubyGems currently complain during gem build: ~~~ WARNING: license value 'MIT AND (BSD-2-Clause OR GPL-2.0-or-later)' is invalid. Use a license identifier from http://spdx.org/licenses or 'Nonstandard' for a nonstandard license. Did you mean 'AGPL-1.0-or-later', 'AGPL-3.0-or-later', 'BSD-2-Clause-Patent', 'GPL-2.0-or-later', 'LGPL-2.0-or-later'? ~~~ Nothing else then plain list of license identifers is supported ATM. Relates socketry#309
0dabbe9
to
2597153
Compare
RubyGems currently complain during gem build:
Nothing else then plain list of license identifers is supported ATM.
Relates #309
Types of Changes
Contribution