Ah, that's very nice! I had the same understanding, that you could generally mix'n'match BSD and MIT licenses as long as you kept licenses and credited original authors.
In the specific case, the 2 different libraries will for sure be phased out by time, since their implementations are old and not really well designed/coded - but I might as well publish my ongoing work since we've been using this in production for quite some time, and hopefully I could join forces with the rest of the community instead of being a one-man-army - and it's a great improvement over the abandoned software which now has 22 open PR's and 200+ issues on Github - mostly without *any* feedback. Thank you very much for your answer @Henrik! PS: Ah, that's quite funny - I'm from a "farmer-family" as well :-D On 18 January 2017 at 12:20, Henrik Ingo <henrik.i...@avoinelama.fi> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Mikkel Bonde <mikbo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've been maintaining a private piece of package on Github lately, > that's composed from software that's MIT licensed and BSD2 licensed and my > own source code. > > > > The original author(s) abandoned the project(s) and are not answering > neither mails nor "issues" on Github. > > > > Am I allowed to publish this as OSS on eg. Github, and if so - is it > enough to include the original licenses and give credit to original > authors? I think it gets a bit hard to figure out whenever you mix licenses. > > > > Yes: Taking over abandoned source code is one of the major points of > open source! > > Some licenses mix well with others and some don't. The general point > is that if two licenses have contradictory requirements, you cannot > satisfy the combination of them. For the so called "short permissive" > licenses like BSD and MIT, the general consensus is that they can be > mixed with pretty much anything else. > > The only annoying part when mixing two of them together is that you > must still correctly retain the license for each piece of code. So the > source code file that was originally BSD licensed must retain the BSD > license in its header, and likewise for the file that is MIT license. > You must just be careful not to mix them. For example, you may not > want to mix MIT code and BSD code into the same file, just to keep > things simple. > > > henrik > PS: I like your name! In my ancestral line some hundred years ago > there was a sequence of men called Mikkel. And they were of course > farmers. One was even called Mikkel Mikkelsson, as his father was > Mikkel too. > > > -- > henrik.i...@avoinelama.fi > +358-40-5697354 skype: henrik.ingo irc: hingo > www.openlife.cc > > My LinkedIn profile: http://fi.linkedin.com/pub/henrik-ingo/3/232/8a7 > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@opensource.org > https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > -- Mvh, Mikkel Bonde Reberbansgade 52 2. mf 9000 Aalborg Kontakt: #: 28 68 01 33 @: mikbo...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
