Relicense under GPLv3 - Githubissues

MrGlockenspiel commented 2 years ago

All significant contributors need to approve this for it to take effect

asoji commented 2 years ago

I, asoji, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license

OneYellowLemon commented 2 years ago

I, OneYellowLemon, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license

aprunge commented 2 years ago

I, aprung, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license

ReperakDev commented 2 years ago

OneYellowLemon commented 2 years ago

I approve even tho I've only contributed to 1 branch

@asoji Please follow the wording I used in mine. Legal bureaucracy ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

ReperakDev commented 2 years ago

I approve even tho I've only contributed to 1 branch

@asoji Please follow the wording I used in mine. Legal bureaucracy ¯(ツ)/¯

:nerd_face:

asoji commented 2 years ago

Edited.

OneYellowLemon commented 2 years ago

@Ruby-Dragon @ForumPlayer @Piraty @Cake967

I'm going to go ahead and mention all of you so you see this 😉

If you approve, please follow the form I, <name>, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license. Legal bureaucracy ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Ruby-Dragon commented 2 years ago

I approve

NickGenghar commented 2 years ago

I, NickGenghar, agree to activate-linux being re-licensed under the GPLv3 license.

OneYellowLemon commented 2 years ago

I approve

Please see my edited comment above :)

10maurycy10 commented 2 years ago

I, 10maurycy10, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license.

ReperakDev commented 2 years ago

btw if this gets merged you gotta add the drip to the readme

asoji commented 2 years ago

@MrGlockenspiel maybe add that to the PR while you're at it

wait does this have to be added to the other dumb whatiswrongwithyoupeoplepleasegooutsideandtouchsomegrassandmaybegetsomebitches branch too

MrGlockenspiel commented 2 years ago

it technically does not and that branch can remain on the based license +we would have to get every contributor for that branch to agree separately i believe

asoji commented 2 years ago

P AI N

ReperakDev commented 2 years ago

it technically does not and that branch can remain on the based license +we would have to get every contributor for that branch to agree separately i believe

there's literally two contributors and one is yourself

asoji commented 2 years ago

true 😎

MrGlockenspiel commented 2 years ago

oh I thought there were more oh well

MrGlockenspiel commented 2 years ago

anyway we have GPL drip now

asoji commented 2 years ago

oh I thought there were more oh well

my dude that branch literally changes it to

Activate ur mom Go to Settings to activate deez nuts.

so it was always a 2 contributor joke branch at best 😆

10maurycy10 commented 2 years ago

my dude that branch literally changes it to

Activate ur mom Go to Settings to activate deez nuts.

so it was always a 2 contributor joke branch at best 😆

my change was chaning the perms on one file.

ReperakDev commented 2 years ago

anyway we have GPL drip now

You gotta have the logo, its so much better than those done-to-death badges

athendrix commented 2 years ago

My contribution is hardly anything I'd consider "major" but nevertheless, I, athendrix, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license

MrGlockenspiel commented 2 years ago

anyway we have GPL drip now

You gotta have the logo, its so much better than those done-to-death badges

The images are not split and i am lazy

ReperakDev commented 2 years ago

lattera commented 2 years ago

Though I'm quite biased towards the 2-clause BSD license, I don't have much of an opinion on licensing choice for this project. I approve of switching my code contributions to this project to a copyleft license like the GPL.

jcontoso commented 2 years ago

I, ohno9119, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license.

Newbytee commented 2 years ago

You could also dual licence it as GPL-3.0 and Based if you want to keep the funny.

bluelhf commented 2 years ago

I, bluelhf, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license

tamara-schmitz commented 2 years ago

I, tamara-schmitz, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license

WebFreak001 commented 2 years ago

I, WebFreak, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license

WoMspace commented 2 years ago

Can someone explain why we're moving from Based License to GPL3? I think Glock said on discord it's due to some funk with Based but what exactly is it?

Newbytee commented 2 years ago

For one thing, Based Licence is a nonfree licence which prevents this from being packaged in many distributions.

WoMspace commented 2 years ago

Ah yes I just saw #76. I, WoMspace, agree to activate-linux being re-licensed under the GPLv3 license.

OneYellowLemon commented 2 years ago

We're down to just four contributors who need to approve still!

@Ruby-Dragon Please edit your comment or post a new one to follow the legal speak everyone else is using 😉

Ruby-Dragon commented 2 years ago

Fine, I, Ruby-Dragon, agree to change the Licence of activate-linux to GPLv3

Ruby-Dragon commented 2 years ago

Can we just delete the other branch?

ReperakDev commented 2 years ago

Ah yes I just saw #76. I, WoMapace, agree to activate-linux being re-licensed under the GPLv3 license.

You spelled your own name wrong L

WoMspace commented 2 years ago

Ah yes I just saw #76. I, WoMapace, agree to activate-linux being re-licensed under the GPLv3 license.

You spelled your own name wrong L

Fricking phone autocorrect. Fixed it.

ReperakDev commented 2 years ago

LGTM btw. if the remaining contributors havent responded by now they probably dont give a shit

TechnologyClassroom commented 2 years ago

I believe @Piraty is the only one with legally significant contributions absent from agreeing. 60++ 67 --

Ruby-Dragon commented 2 years ago

We should probably update the release after this so it has the correct licence

Piraty commented 2 years ago

i'm fine with gpl, would have preferred a permissive license though

MrGlockenspiel commented 2 years ago

Ok looks like thats everyone Merging now

ForumPlayer commented 2 years ago

Hold on guys, i didn't had time to check this before, but I agree with the re-licensing (legal statement in the next comment) There's just a thing @MrGlockenspiel forgot.. to add all the info to the License :/ On lines 644, 645, and 655, all of then on LICENSE.md. Even through this, I still agree.

TechnologyClassroom commented 2 years ago

@ForumPlayer Lines 644-655 should not be modified in the LICENSE.md file itself and modifying the file will break automatic identification done by GitHub and other forges. Those are instructions for applying GPL standard license headers to individual files that the license covers.

ForumPlayer commented 2 years ago

@TechnologyClassroom that's really strange.. I use to edit those lines and GitHub always detected the license correctly.

ForumPlayer commented 2 years ago

I, ForumPlayer, agree to activate-linux being relicensed under the GPLv3 license.

PGP Signed Version (Key available on OpenPGP Keyserver)

MrGlockenspiel / activate-linux

Relicense under GPLv3 #79