LICENSE MISSING - Githubissues

GAIA-X4PLC-AAD / ontology-management-base

Our implementation for an open automated ontology management process for GAIA-X interoperable ecosystems. Please use a community agreed domain specific class or if not yet available please create a new class and submit it for review.

Other

2 stars 0 forks source link

LICENSE MISSING #22

Closed jdsika closed 1 month ago

jdsika commented 2 months ago

I actually lean towarld MPL-2.0

Update: Due to the input I am ok with EPL 2.0

jdsika commented 2 months ago

@lenasauermann please provide all documents this repository is relying as links to the original source including the licenses used in the references. This is a critical information for us and we need this asap

lenasauermann commented 2 months ago

FC Repo with Base Gaia-X Shapes https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/xfsc/cat/fc-service : Apache License 2.0 Shapes von Gaia-X WG https://gitlab.com/gaia-x/technical-committee/service-characteristics : Eclipse Public License 2.0 Gaia-X Trustframework 22.10 https://docs.gaia-x.eu/policy-rules-committee/trust-framework/latest/editorial_information/ : Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License --> eventuell nur für das Dokument relevant

lenasauermann commented 2 months ago

Policy and Rules Confirmity Document: https://docs.gaia-x.eu/policy-rules-committee/policy-rules-conformity-document/latest/ komische License

robertschubert commented 2 months ago

https://github.com/GAIA-X4PLC-AAD/ontology-management-base/issues/22#issuecomment-2056703976

The CREATIVE COMMONS license described here relates only to the specific document, not to the artifacts described. The sentence "Third party material or references are cited in this document." (not sure if it is new) should underline this.

robertschubert commented 2 months ago

My proposal for license in this repository ist EPL-2.0. Reasons:

this license is used also for the repositories not running under eclipse, e. g. https://gitlab.com/gaia-x/technical-committee/service-characteristics. So we achieve some kind of homogen set of licenses.
we remain a weak copyleft here.
Compatibility With GPL is not relevant, at least for now.

But: I am also fine with MPL-2.0 but we have the risk of patent issues (which is not much likely). MIT also good for me but we lose the weak copyleft und must hope that changes / proposals will be reflected by PR by the community.

jdsika commented 2 months ago

My proposal for license in this repository ist EPL-2.0. Reasons:
* this license is used also for the repositories not running under eclipse, e. g. https://gitlab.com/gaia-x/technical-committee/service-characteristics. So we achieve some kind of homogen set of licenses.

* we remain a weak copyleft here.

* Compatibility With GPL is not relevant, at least for now.
But: I am also fine with MPL-2.0 but we have the risk of patent issues (which is not much likely). MIT also good for me but we lose the weak copyleft und must hope that changes / proposals will be reflected by PR by the community.

ok, we have all 3 options on the table. In fact the active contributors are the ones deciding this eventually and the ones who want to contribute in the future must be ok with it as well. Being in line with other licenses at GaiaX is a good argument.

I AM OK WITH EPL 2.0 and I have changed my PR accordingly

jdsika commented 2 months ago

We can also demonstrate nicely that you do not have to use the same license subsequently by e.g. using MPL 2.0 here as this will likely find its way into OpenMSL

jdsika commented 2 months ago

@robertschubert please approve and merge my license PR

robertschubert commented 2 months ago

@jdsika I added one review remark. After this is clear I will merge it.