search

choojs / discuss

🎭 – Discuss project organization, initiatives, and anything else!
Apache License 2.0
8 stars 1 forks source link

relicense all code to apache-2 #1

Open yoshuawuyts opened 7 years ago

yoshuawuyts commented 7 years ago

It has recently become clear that the MIT license leaves much to be desired – and when we see spot a flaw in our ecosystem, I think we should fix it.

I was thinking we switch all of our projects over to Apache-2. It's clearer language than MIT and has an explicit portion on patent licensing. Chances are also big that people have heard of this license before, and know what it stands for. More on this in /dev/lawyer/oss-business-perception-report.

@choojs/trainspotters thoughts?

lrlna commented 7 years ago

@yoshuawuyts totes agree! i say go for it :v:

yoshuawuyts commented 7 years ago

Also cc @conoro – you mentioned the Red Hat license at some point; perhaps you have input? Thanks! :grin:

YerkoPalma commented 7 years ago

What's wrong with MIT license?

yoshuawuyts commented 7 years ago

@YerkoPalma it says nothing about patents, making it super ambiguous what's up with that. Apache-2.0 is clear about all that, and with #3 it'd pretty much be an upgrade from our current situation, legal wise.

The intro to https://writing.kemitchell.com/2016/04/18/Berneout-Pledge.html is super interesting to read, if you're interested in the topic!

YerkoPalma commented 7 years ago

Thanks for the backgrounds, I'll check the link

graforlock commented 7 years ago

If the case is for just making it explicit, then ok, pick a license that describe whats the rules.

Other than that, patents are evil (to quote Stallman or Donald Knuth).

conoro commented 7 years ago

@yoshuawuyts Big thumbs up from me for Apache-2. We preferred that instead of MIT when open sourcing Red Hat Mobile due to the patent clauses.

bcomnes commented 7 years ago

No objections here

s3ththompson commented 7 years ago

Thumbs up for Apache-2 from me!