-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 152
Replace CC0 or add additional public domain-like license option #315
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
Comments
The repository was published under the terms "public domain". #291 complained this was ambiguous, and we changed to CC0 in #292, which I understand to be the equivalent of releasing into the public domain. Looking at unlicense, this seems fine. @BastianZim, WDYT? |
Unlicense is also f 8000 ine with me so I'm happy either way. :) And yes, seems like that is the way to go if that helps Fedora as both licenses seem pretty much the same. |
Thank you! |
Fedora (which packages python-versioneer) recently reclassified CC0 as disallowed for code because it has a clause that precludes the granting of a patent license, which we consider to be inconsistent with FOSS legal norms.
While we likely will grant some sort of exception for packages that were already in Fedora as of the date of the reclassification, I am wondering if you would consider either changing the license to another ultra-permissive option that does not have the "no patent licenses" clause problem (examples: MIT-0, 0BSD, Unlicense) or dual-license python-versioneer under CC0 and one of these other licenses.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: