Hi, Am 23.08.2011 um 06:41 schrieb Erik Larsson:
> Hi, > > As cherry-picking from Fuse4X and OSXFUSE is becoming more relevant in the > future, I realized that the issue of licensing isn't very clear. > > Specifically, I'm unsure about the licensing status of Fuse4x. The homepage > doesn't say anything about this. > Under what license does Anatol release his contributions to the code? We > cannot cherry-pick modifications with unknown legal status from other > projects. (I tried to look around in the github repositories, but couldn't > find any legal notice.) It might be a good idea to add the licensing information to each submodule (kext, fuse, ...) not just the main/build repository. > I will assume that OSXFUSE contributors should follow in Tuxera's and > Google's footsteps and license modifications under the BSD license? Do you > have any objections Benjamin? No I don't. Otherwise we would end up in a licensing mess. Everyone who wants to commit to OSXFUSE should release the modifications under a BSD license. > Including (and even using compiled versions of) code with unclear legal > status could get someone into trouble, so this needs to be very explicitly > stated. > > Regards, > > - Erik > Regards, Benjamin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacFUSE" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macfuse?hl=en.
