Closed emberian closed 7 years ago
All for it.
I approve dual licensing under MIT/Apache.
:+1:
:+1:
This is me, explicitly approving!
I approve dual licensing under MIT/Apache.
sure, whatever :)
Sounds great to me!
:+1:
Good I had not made a real contribution, don't care me.
:+1:
Sure, why not. :+1:
Still waiting on @rlane, @Aatch, and @csherratt
Oh, I actually contributed to this. I'm fine with it.
I approve dual licensing under MIT/Apache.
Are you fine with this @rlane?
bump @rlane
Sure.
Why?
The MIT license requires reproducing countless copies of the same copyright header with different names in the copyright field, for every MIT library in use. The Apache license does not have this drawback, and has protections from patent trolls and an explicit contribution licensing clause. However, the Apache license is incompatible with GPLv2. This is why Rust is dual-licensed as MIT/Apache (the "primary" license being Apache, MIT only for GPLv2 compat), and doing so would be wise for this project. This also makes this crate suitable for inclusion in the Rust standard distribution and other project using dual MIT/Apache.
How?
To do this, get explicit approval from each contributor of copyrightable work (as not all contributions qualify for copyright) and then add the following to your README:
and in your license headers, use the following boilerplate (based on that used in Rust):
And don't forget to update the
license
metadata in yourCargo.toml
!Contributor checkoff