search

CVMix / CVMix-src

CVMix source code (including protex documentation) as well as build system and examples / tests
Other
30 stars 29 forks source link

License #87

Open koldunovn opened 4 years ago

koldunovn commented 4 years ago

Dear CVMix developers,

Can you, please, include the license to your code? The thing is, without a license, the code of your library is in the "All rights reserved" category ( https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/ ). So it can't be officially used by other modeling groups. If I am wrong, and just did not find it, can you, please provide the statement about the license in the README?

mnlevy1981 commented 3 years ago

@koldunovn -- sorry to take so long to respond to this issue. As of v0.99-beta CVMix is now officially covered by LGPLv3

koldunovn commented 3 years ago

Thanks a lot for the update! Ping @patrickscholz and @dsidoren so they get the info.

mnlevy1981 commented 1 year ago

Reopening this issue because it seems like the LGPL license we went with is too restrictive to allow collaboration with some industry partners (specifically, NVIDIA corporate policy forbids contributing to repositories bound by LGPLv3 out of concern that it puts them at risk of a lawsuit claiming their proprietary software is now also bound by LGPL). I don't know what is involved in switching to an Apache, BSD, or other open source license.

koldunovn commented 1 year ago

I think you can just change the license as long as people who contributed so far do not mind. For FESOM it would be also a great solution, since we can't have CVMix as part of the repo for some of the projects.

mnlevy1981 commented 1 year ago

@koldunovn I was hoping I could get away with only talking to the folks who have contributed since we adopted the LGPL license (since adopting that license was the last commit), but I suspect you are right.

koldunovn commented 1 year ago

This is what GPT4 thinks about it :)

Prompt: Consider the situation. Initially the project did not have any license. Then at some point it adopted the LGPL3 license. If we want to change license to Apache, should we ask permissions only from users who contributed in the period after LGPL3 was adopted, or we have to ask all people who contributed from the very beginning of the project?

Answer: If a project initially did not have any license and later adopted the LGPLv3 license, you would generally need to obtain permission from all contributors who made contributions after the adoption of the LGPLv3 license. Contributors who made contributions before the project was under any license may not have the same legal expectations regarding their contributions.

However, to be on the safe side, it is still a good practice to notify and seek permission from all contributors, including those who contributed before the adoption of the LGPLv3 license. This way, you can ensure that all parties are aware of the license change and provide an opportunity for them to voice any concerns or objections.

Always keep in mind that changing a license can have legal implications, and it's essential to consult with legal experts if needed.