The license should be explicitly stated

dancek commented 7 years ago

Illum seems to be licensed under AGPLv3, which is mentioned at least in illum.spec and the Arch Linux package. This is not immediately obvious.

The license should be stated in at least some of the following ways.

[ ] a mention in README
[ ] a file called COPYING with the fulltext
[ ] copyright notice and a statement of copying permission in each source file

Whichever license you plan to use, the process involves adding two elements to each source file of your program: a copyright notice (such as “Copyright 1999 Terry Jones”), and a statement of copying permission, saying that the program is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License (or the Lesser GPL).

See https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html

dancek commented 7 years ago

For me, just a mention in README would be enough for practical purposes. This is probably bad legal advice, though.

codyps commented 7 years ago

You're right, I should really put that somewhere other than the pkgbuild (which isn't even in this repo) and the rpm spec (which for practical purposes I don't use). I've added a readme entry

codyps / illum

The license should be explicitly stated #4