Open Pign opened 1 year ago
+1, this would be good to clarify, especially as a former issue (https://github.com/nodemailer/mailparser/issues/188) seems to indicate a move away from the MIT license entirely, yet today the EUPL license is only referenced on the website, and not in the LICENSE
file in the repo.
The README states MIT at the end
The website now also states
Dual licensed under MIT or EUPLv1.1+
So it seems reasonable to conclude that it can be considered as MIT licensed now.
Hello and thanks for the work on this module.
Unless I am mistaken, the code repo mentions MIT as being the license for it while the page https://nodemailer.com/extras/mailparser/ mentions MIT and EUPL.
Is it possible to clarify what are applicable licenses? Those two seem to me (not a lawyer) to be very different since EUPL is, as far as I understand it, highly contaminating (although I like the idea of it being European and emanating from the Commission).