-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 122
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clarify license #512
Comments
Different parts are covered by different licenses. The software is a composite. The portions of the software that are written by us are Zlib licensed. However, since a signficant part of the end result is OpenJDK, that part falls under their license, which is a variety of different things as well. Most of their code is GPLv2+CPE, though other portions are different. |
Is it possible to clarify clearly which portions are Zlib and which are not? Eventually by putting the right license in each top folder?
venerdì 12 aprile 2024 alle ore 18:53:23 CEST, Jerome Haltom ***@***.***> ha scritto:
Different parts are covered by different licenses. The software is a composite. The portions of the software that are written by us are Zlib licensed. However, since a signficant part of the end result is OpenJDK, that part falls under their license, which is a variety of different things as well. Most of their code is GPLv2+CPE, though other portions are different.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
I think that's covered pretty well already. Is there something you can't find? |
So to recap:
the folder openjdk/jdk8u GPLv2+CPE. Everything else is Zlib. At the same time the license here: https://github.com/ikvmnet/ikvm?tab=License-1-ov-file#readme doesn't specify any distinction and so yes I believe there is still something to clarify. I don't think a comment in a github issue has the same value as a license file.
Il venerdì 12 aprile 2024 alle ore 20:15:08 CEST, Jerome Haltom ***@***.***> ha scritto:
I think that's covered pretty well already. Is there something you can't find?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Have you looked at the files? |
I mean some of the newer ones are missing headers it looks like. But the vast majority have headers. |
Like this one for example ikvm/src/IKVM.ByteCode/ByteCodeException.cs at main · ikvmnet/ikvm ?
ikvm/src/IKVM.ByteCode/ByteCodeException.cs at main · ikvmnet/ikvm
Just code, no license.
Il venerdì 12 aprile 2024 alle ore 20:27:39 CEST, Jerome Haltom ***@***.***> ha scritto:
Have you looked at the files?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
That's my point. The ones that do not have the header are under both GPL with exception and zlib.And yes I looked at the source code before raising this issue.My point is valid.
Il venerdì 12 aprile 2024 alle ore 20:31:28 CEST, Jerome Haltom ***@***.***> ha scritto:
I mean some of the newer ones are missing headers it looks like. But the vast majority have headers.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Yup. That's what I was asking. Looks like ByteCode is missing license information. |
There are plenty of files that are missing the header. Do you need the complete list?
Il venerdì 12 aprile 2024 alle ore 21:45:19 CEST, Jerome Haltom ***@***.***> ha scritto:
Yup. That's what I was asking. Looks like ByteCode is missing license information.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
It's pretty difficult to understand what is licensed under which license. Is the project Zlip / LPGL or GNU? Is it possible to chose any license or are there sections that are covered by one license rather than the other?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: