On 2018-04-24 10:36 AM, mhoye wrote:
On 2018-04-24 10:24 AM, David Teller wrote:
What's our policy for this? Are there any restrictions? All the
frameworks I currently have at hand are have either an MIT- or an
MIT-like license, so in theory, we need to copy the license somewhere in
the test repo, right?

I think that this is my question to answer now; I've taken on licensing questions in Gerv's absence. I'm new to this part of the job, so it'll take me a day or two to get the answer; I'll come back to this thread when I have it.

Well, more than a day or two. The MIT license is fine to include, and we have a pile of MIT-licensed code in-tree already.

Other already-in-tree MPL-2.0 compatible licenses - the "just do it" set, basically - include Apache 2.0, BSD 2- and 3-clause, LGPL 2.1 and 3.0, GPL 3.0 and the Unicode Consortium's ICU.

We have a handful of oddballs in various places though I think we can cull some of them out - the Anti-Grain-Geometry stuff has recently been relicensed under the GPL, for example.

For anything not on that list a legal bug is def. the next step.

- mhoye
dev-platform mailing list

Reply via email to