I've noticed that the package.json file claims an Apache 2.0 license, and several other files claim MPLv2. Should this software be one of those, or MIT or...?
We're moving away from MIT due to lack of patent protection. Either of Apache 2 or MPL are fine. I'd say use MPL throughout and be done with it. If Simon disagrees, he can suggest something else.
The decision for whether to use Apache-2.0 or MPL-2.0 is whether we want other people to build on our code, since it has a "must distribute source code with binaries" provision. For the MakeAPI, I think MPL-2.0 is fine.
Created attachment 742510 [details] [review] https://github.com/mozilla/MakeAPI/pull/42 I've added a LICENSE file with the MPL-2.0 text in it. I've also added headers to all the source code files.
Comment on attachment 742510 [details] [review] https://github.com/mozilla/MakeAPI/pull/42 This looks fine to me. I'd like Simon to sign-off on it, as this code originated with him. Adding him for review.
From irc: 14:27 < wex> MPL2 +1 14:27 < wex> yup
Staged on Master: https://github.com/mozilla/MakeAPI/commit/8b7ca129c32940d9ec1d6e89682d38a52ed06233
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 6 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Attachment mime type: text/plain → text/x-github-pull-request
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.