search

devunwired / recyclerview-playground

Examples of RecyclerView use and custom LayoutManager implementations
MIT License
1.25k stars 270 forks source link

Suggest Apache 2.0 license #1

Closed RoundSparrow closed 9 years ago

RoundSparrow commented 10 years ago

Hello. Thank you for your work!

I suggest you add Apache 2.0 license (dual license) so the code can be mixed easier with Android samples that Google provides. As it is now, being MIT license, often people would be mixing code from different sources and even if they are "compatible" - they are distinctive... so it becomes hybrid code. Thank you for the consideration.

AndroidDeveloperLB commented 10 years ago

I think both licenses are almost identical. I don't think it matters much.

devunwired commented 10 years ago

@RoundSparrow Can you explain a bit more the mixing problems you believe this creates? I don't believe the Apache license is a good license for sample code like this because it includes an implicit pubic attribution requirement; MIT does not include this. One can freely mix the two without any undue burdens that I am aware of.

RoundSparrow commented 10 years ago

The trouble can be that devs generally copy paste a denw lines here and there.. And the source of it sort of has to be tracked. And lawyers profit from having to research each librayn client... The author can multi license.. And even reduce clauses... But often authors disappear years later.

It was just a suggestion... Thank u for the code. SDK 5.0 out now!

devunwired commented 9 years ago

Thanks for the thoughts and feedback. I see these things being issues regardless of the chosen license, and I think I'd prefer to keep things the way they are for now. I may look in the future at a modified version of Apache that would better suit sample code use cases.