Closed jackhill closed 6 years ago
Good question. I would like to use MIT, but I need to review the licenses of the third-party tools.
Thanks, makes sense.
On Mon, 6 Nov 2017, Brian DuSell wrote:
Good question. I would like to use MIT, but I need to review the licenses of the third-party tools.
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.[AKqXlIsaISeXZ3_rGe9rcXCxkC4Uo7fPks5sz0OJgaJpZM4QSqhg.gif]
sfntly - Apache2. woff2 - MIT. FontForge - GNU GPL 3+ / revised BSD license
licensing usually goes by the most limiting one, which is GNU GPL 3, but FontForge is not really distributed, so it can be ignored :]
MIT is the same as Apache (Apache is a bit more permissive),
so you might as well choose MIT.
Thanks for the research, @eladkarako! Technically none of the libraries are "distributed" except insofar as the setup
script downloads and compiles their source code, as is the case with snftly and woff2. Anyway, given the fact that FontForge is simply assumed to be installed on the host system, according to the terms of GNU GPLv3, there is no need for the terms of the license to be propagated to webfont-generator.
The license of the project will be MIT.
What is the license of this project?
Thanks!