Closed couchand closed 2 months ago
This was added to the readme because the licenses are autogenerated by a build script, but I checked them and they are correct.
Isn't a mention enough? What would you recommend we do more? I'm open to removing this sentence from the readme if it's the problem.
This project looks very interesting and useful. I'm confused about the licensing situation here. The readme mentions:
It seems like understanding and complying with the terms of the source package licenses would be a necessary first step ahead of repackaging them for distribution? There are important terms that this project might not be in compliance with. For instance, at least the MIT-licensed projects expect their copyright notice to be maintained.