search

anihacc / Ultimacraft-project-public-notice

All mod developers interested in why I've forked 1.3K repositories, READ THIS!
5 stars 0 forks source link

License issues with mono-jar #10

Closed serenibyss closed 1 year ago

serenibyss commented 1 year ago

Certain projects (such as your forked GregTech) are licensed under the LGPL license. While an open source project, the LGPL stipulates that all sections of code released as part of your "program" need be licensed under the LGPL license. However, certain other projects (such as this random fork I was quickly able to find, PolyLib) uses the BSD 4-clause license, which is not compatible with the LGPL license, which would be a license breach. There are many examples of this, and these mods could not be combined into a single jar as a result without violating license.

Vazkii commented 1 year ago

sounds like a skill issue to me, if this were me I'd simply not violate the licenses

serenibyss commented 1 year ago

sounds like a skill issue to me, if this were me I'd simply not violate the licenses

this is so true, time to make the mono-jar all rights reserved

mothmoss commented 1 year ago

mothmoss

briarss commented 1 year ago

mothmoss

Decencies commented 1 year ago

sounds like a skill issue to me, if this were me I'd simply not violate the licenses

at this point, anything containing the word 'license' is ignored :trollface:

anihacc commented 1 year ago

I got a suggestion to split up the project into multiple parts for various reasons, but one of them was to group licenses together. MIT goes with MIT, LGPL goes with LGPL, etc.

Bluexin commented 1 year ago

Certain projects (such as your forked GregTech) are licensed under the LGPL license. While an open source project, the LGPL stipulates that all sections of code released as part of your "program" need be licensed under the LGPL license. However, certain other projects (such as this random fork I was quickly able to find, PolyLib) uses the BSD 4-clause license, which is not compatible with the LGPL license, which would be a license breach. There are many examples of this, and these mods could not be combined into a single jar as a result without violating license.

@DStrand1 from what I understand, LGPL actually permits this with a few restrictions, see section 5 :

  1. Combined Libraries.

You may place library facilities that are a work based on the Library side by side in a single library together with other library facilities that are not Applications and are not covered by this License, and convey such a combined library under terms of your choice, if you do both of the following:

a) Accompany the combined library with a copy of the same work based on the Library, uncombined with any other library facilities, conveyed under the terms of this License. b) Give prominent notice with the combined library that part of it is a work based on the Library, and explaining where to find the accompanying uncombined form of the same work.

disclaimer : I don't think this project will go anywhere due to the massive amount of work that would be required (nor do I think this project is a good idea), I'm just trying to debunk some myths around OSS licenses as well as further my own understanding of them

anihacc commented 1 year ago

Thank you for doing that.

On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 9:11 AM Arnaud Solé @.***> wrote:

Certain projects (such as your forked GregTech https://github.com/anihacc/GregTech-1) are licensed under the LGPL license. While an open source project, the LGPL stipulates that all sections of code released as part of your "program" need be licensed under the LGPL license. However, certain other projects (such as this random fork I was quickly able to find, PolyLib https://github.com/anihacc/PolyLib) uses the BSD 4-clause license, which is not compatible with the LGPL license, which would be a license breach. There are many examples of this, and these mods could not be combined into a single jar as a result without violating license.

@DStrand1 https://github.com/DStrand1 from what I understand, LGPL actually permits this with a few restrictions, see section 5 :

  1. Combined Libraries.

You may place library facilities that are a work based on the Library side by side in a single library together with other library facilities that are not Applications and are not covered by this License, and convey such a combined library under terms of your choice, if you do both of the following:

a) Accompany the combined library with a copy of the same work based on the Library, uncombined with any other library facilities, conveyed under the terms of this License. b) Give prominent notice with the combined library that part of it is a work based on the Library, and explaining where to find the accompanying uncombined form of the same work.

disclaimer : I don't think this project will go anywhere due to the massive amount of work that would be required (nor do I think this project is a good idea), I'm just trying to debunk some myths around OSS licenses as well as further my own understanding of them

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/anihacc/Ultimacraft-project-public-notice/issues/10#issuecomment-1474875006, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AVG6Y2CJASNEZOQORTTKIODW4XGD3ANCNFSM6AAAAAAV5ZWOWI . You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.Message ID: @.*** .com>

-- Sonya Copley