Closed jakirkham closed 7 years ago
@jakirkham Hmm, my intention was not to make this BSD 4-Clause. It should definitely be either MIT/BSD dual-licensed or Apache 2.0 License. Any preference?
Not particularly. As long as the number of BSD clauses are less than 4 (assuming it stays BSD), I am happy.
@skudriashev any preference?
@mahmoudimus, not really. MIT would be fine I guess.
Should I submit a PR to make it MIT then?
@jakirkham would appreciate that! also add yourself to the contributors list please!
@jakirkham @mahmoudimus Is this a thing anymore?
Looks like we're OK to close this issue.
Why? It doesn't appear to be fixed.
Please see PR ( https://github.com/mahmoudimus/nose-timer/pull/81 ) for the fix.
@jakirkham I'm sorry, we still have both licenses
No worries.
Trying to understand why the BSD 4-Clause is present here. It is known that the advertising clause causes serious problems. So, I am trying to understand why it was added and whether it can be removed (i.e. the license converted to BSD 3-Clause or similar).