-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
unclear license #1
Comments
Thanks for the report. I clarified in the README.md which license I meant. |
if it's not too annoying, having a dedicated "LICENSE" file makes tooling a lot easier. GH for example will detect & add a chip for the right license. automated source code scanners (which CrOS uses) looks for dedicated license files, especially when attribution is required in documentation/releases (which BSD usually requires). when the Copyright lines are smashed into source files, it's much harder to automatically & reliably extract. |
I see the argument, but I dislike adding a file to every archive which is longer than the whole source code. |
MIT has the same attribution requirements as BSD-2. related, for the README & source files, i'd recommend adding SPDX-License-Identifier tags. those are succinct & clear which sounds like what you want. they help with automating compliance checking tools, although they don't help with automating attribution :/. to be clear: i have no problem with any of these licenses, or the fact they require attribution in documentation, or if you wanted to use them. it's just that the current code structure in this repo is nigh impossible to automate, so anyone utilizing this package has to manually audit/enumerate it. i grok your pref to keep the checkout lean even if it's not the choice i would make. |
Thank you very much for your remarks, and especially for the hint to the SPDX-License-Identifier tags which I was not aware of. |
the README says "BSD license", but that is ambiguous: there are 5 variants based on the number of clauses
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses
please add a LICENSE file to the repo so it's clear which one exactly you want to use
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: