Closed bloerwald closed 1 year ago
No objection from me.
👍
Make it so.
Fine with me 👍
I'm fine with it
k
Lgtm (looks good to me)
Approved.
Fine with me.
I see no issue with it. Suprised you've to even ask permission after the smallest of contributions even.
I see no issue with it. Suprised you've to even ask permission after the smallest of contributions even.
That's how serious people handle it. They did that with DBCD the same way. The only reasonable way to do that ^^
I see no issue with it. Suprised you've to even ask permission after the smallest of contributions even.
For the license to be enforceable, it needs to be approved by every contributor. Adding a license without such approval could lead to legal issues.
Approved.
I approve of the new license.
👍
Seems good! 👍
Friendly reminder for @alinsavix (1 commit), @barncastle (94 commits), @HelloKitty (1 commit) and @Razinao (2 commits) to refuse the license for another few days until Dec 26th before I assume approval.
Works for me. 👍
Two weeks passed, the licenses are very lax, and a strong majority voted to accept. /merge
This repository didn't have a license so far, which generally is a bad idea.
This technically changes the license. Thus, technically, all prior contributors need to agree to the new license. The licenses chosen are permissible while also requiring attribution, with the purpose to not "steal" from anyone.
Due to this being a potentially sensitive issue, I suggest there being a period of a week or two for past contributors to disagree. If you do, please reply to this pull request. In the best case, you also reply if you agree, so this doesn't take longer than it needs to. If there is no objection, I assume acceptance. I hope this doesn't hurt anyone.