-
Licensed as Apache2.0 but with additional terms: https://github.com/caprover/caprover/blob/a563cd0dd593a7995b51e05fd64debed756677f6/LICENSE
Additional terms limit modification in an awkward way, dist…
-
Por lo que había entendido el proyecto es open source, así que debería indicarse en el [README](README.md) la licencia, para que la gente que quiera contribuir sepa bajo qué condiciones lo hace, y ten…
-
a license file is missing, package.json states it's Apache2.0
ghost updated
4 years ago
-
Could this repo get a MIT or Apache2 license?
It could be useful for language model prompting.
-
When I used the command nbdev_new it created a settings.ini with `license = apache2.`, How can I change it to GPL-3.0-only ?
And why is the[ SPDX short identifier](https://spdx.org/licenses/) not u…
-
This project is very useful to us. I have not found a license under which it is released. Would it be possible to release under an open source license (e.g. Apache2)?
-
Hello maintainers! We have received a report from the CNCF license audit that the following paths contain licenses that do not match the project license. You can find the full report here: https://lfs…
-
Hi! We'd love to use your code in our software but we can't use anything without a license file. Can you add something easy like the MIT, BSD, or Apache2 license to the repo?
Thanks!
-
What is the license of this package? It's a very important part of a package. Please add any public license like MIT or Apache2 etc.
-
This is a sign-off issue as per [RFC 2044](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2044) ([tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/43461)) to license the `rust-lang/rfcs` repo under du…
est31 updated
4 months ago