📝(readme) update xl packages info #885
Conversation
virgile-dev
force-pushed
the
small-readme-fixes
branch
2 times, most recently
from
fd01eb8 to
3f99c2e
Compare
|
I suggest we stick to the current message until the technical solution is implemented. |
virgile-dev
force-pushed
the
small-readme-fixes
branch
from
50c4476 to
5dd1210
Compare
|
I strongly suggest not to merge this until the technical solution is in place. |
sampaccoud
force-pushed
the
small-readme-fixes
branch
from
5dd1210 to
419d4e9
Compare
|
@bzg after close consideration, I choose to merge this PR. The implementation to make the packages optional will be done next week but the current sentence also failed to precisely reflect the current situation: yes there is an incompatibility between our MIT licence and the BlockNote XL AGPL licence, but we discussed with the maintainer and he considers that, as long as the code remains open (whether commercial or not), there is no issue. |
Info message so people fulfill their licencing obligations Signed-off-by: virgile-dev <virgile.deville@beta.gouv.fr>
virgile-dev
force-pushed
the
small-readme-fixes
branch
from
419d4e9 to
2e402ea
Compare
|
If the implementation will be in the code next week, why not wait? The discussion between @virgile-dev, @lunika and DINUM's legal department led to this conclusion: the warning is needed to inform reusers of their obligations regarding license compliance. With 11.6K stars and 275 forks, DINUM must be DTRT. |
Info message so people fulfill their licencing obligations Signed-off-by: virgile-deville <virgile.deville@beta.gouv.fr>
Info message so people fulfill their licencing obligations