marie-kamp
commented
6 months ago @luk-brue feel free to change the license to CC non-commercial. As this originated as a project from a public institution, I think the content should not be monetized.
In the end the university should probably have the last word on this issue.
at the moment, MIT license is used, which is not restricting commercial use. But in the readme.MD, we are asking for noncommercial use only. If we want to restrict commercial use, we have to also change the license with
devtools::change_license()to one of:GNU License (aka, commercial use possible, but only if it is Open Source, which is my favourite at the moment). I think the specific license is called AGPL v2
CC licenses because we actually do not make software, but we write course materials that will be displayed in software. For example, a suitable CC share alike license would make sure our project stays open source. I don't think commercial use is bad, as long as it stays open source. It is actually good because then our project would be improved with money but still be accessible
This is necessary because the used license name is stored in the package metadata, and currently it is set to MIT which is nonrestrictive.