-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
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
Contributor Agreement for License Change [Updated] #2273
Comments
GPLv3-only and Lax |
GPLv3 and Lax |
GPLv3+ and Lax |
GPLv3+ and Lax |
Making sure the second-half of the list of contributors get properly mentioned: @xfq @6543 @ajmeese7 @AceLewis @megfault @Zasei @artemmolotov @Nephos @Austin-Williams @bencevans @valkheim @d14na @thesoftwarejedi @Derson5 @dldx @EdenSG @camponez @Erkan-Yilmaz @Fil @gyulaweber @shakna-israel @flibustier @justinwiley @kseistrup @MRoci @sexybiggetje @BoboTiG @medimatrix @Nodeswitch @Ornataweaver @adrelanos @quasiyoke @Radtoo @RedbHawk @rcmorano @rubo77 @SuperSandro2000 @Thunder33345 @anonym @beigexperience @blurHY @dqwyy @eduaddad @goofy-mdn @krikmo @leycec @mnlg @mymage @probonopd @saber28 |
GPLv3+ and Lax |
1 similar comment
GPLv3+ and Lax |
GPLv3+ |
GPLv3+ and Lax |
Just some useful information for people:
|
Additionally, if you want to find out more about different licenses, http://tldrlegal.com seems to be a decent resource. |
GPLv3+ and Lax |
GPLv3+ |
GPLv3 and Lax |
GPLv3+ |
GPLv3+ and Lax |
Fewer choices was far better for achieving consensus. |
Maybe.. but we shouldn't be dictating completely what people can choose from, because they have to choose it for themselves (legally). Also, I didn't really add that many more choices. Basically, what I'm saying is if people naturally fall into a consensus regarding what they actutally want, then more choices doesn't matter. But if we are getting a consensus with less options but not a consensus with more options, then that just means we're kinda shoehorning people into a consensus when that's not what they really want. The more important change in this update though was to clarify any ambiguity (this is important for legal reasons, along with understandability reasons), so I replaced "Apache" and "Apache-compatible" with "Lax" and was explicit about "Lax" not including the Public Domain. |
GPLv3+ and Lax |
Btw, polite discussion on licenses are welcome and you can change your vote at any time by posting another comment. |
GPLv3 and Lax |
@sirMackk @ysc3839 @mkg20001 @xfq @6543 @d14na @camponez @kseistrup @eduaddad @probonopd @skwerlman I have just noticed that you voted for GPLv3+ . I want to make sure that the GPL options were clear enough, so let me explain it again:
|
GPLv3 and Lax |
GPLv3-only and Lax |
Relicensing as GPLv3 and Lax would be needed in case we make ZeroNet more modularized (#2063) in the future. In this case, ZeroNet libraries (protocol handling and other more low-level things) would then be licensed as Lax license (MIT/BSD). Complete ZeroNet program would then be licensed as GPLv3. This could help making ZeroNet more popular as developers would have already-created modular libraries for extending/building with ZeroNet. Lax license would be needed as such licenses (MIT/BSD) have the ability to be used in most other licenses, so developers won't have to worry about license compatibility so much. |
Lax |
@goofy-mdn Just to make sure: choosing Lax means that we'll have to rewrite all libraries and make others support Lax as well, or remove your contributions. Are you fine with that? |
They could be treated differently if it was specified before... |
I'm ready to change it to GPLv3, but I'm a bit confused if there is separate license.txt for GPLv3 and GPLv3+, because I can't find any other version of it, but all same as https://raw.githubusercontent.com/emacs-mirror/emacs/master/COPYING |
In fact, the license itself doesn't vary, it's the Standard License Header which does: GPLv3-only:
GPLv3+:
|
Ivanq:
In fact, the license itself doesn't vary, it's the Standard License Header which does:
It varies. Better use a diff viewer than trying to see it with bare
eyes. Here's the difference:
First:
Free Software Foundation, version 3.
Second:
… Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
|
True, I wasn't showing the license but the Standard License Header. |
Thanks, I have added the header to the LICENSE file + the standard COPYING: If its fine this way, then I think we can close this issue. |
Great, I wouldn't close this issue yet though, we should get rid of these contributions before. |
How can my translation be used again with the new license? |
@HostFat We'll sure replace it soon I guess, unless you are ready to license it under GPLv3. |
Well, I'm ready I guess, what I need to do? :) |
Just post a comment "GPLv3" under this issue. |
GPLv3 |
Thanks, I've updated the list. |
it is better to segregate non code licenses from now,
usually translations are treated as datasets to main code language strings |
@HelloZeroNet |
Yes, please. |
@imachug @HelloZeroNet Contributing to this repoThis repo is governed by GPLv3, same is located at the root of the ZeroNet git repo, unless specified separately all code is governed by that license, contributions to this repo are divided into two key types, key contributions and non-key contributions, key contributions are which, directly affects the code performance, quality and features of software, non key contributions include things like translation datasets, image, graphic or video contributions that does not affect the main usability of software but improves the existing usability of certain thing or feature, these also include tests written with code, since their purpose is to check, whether something is working or not as intended. Unless specified above a contribution is ruled by the type of contribution if there is a conflict between two contributing parties of repo in any case. |
GPLv3 |
@canewsin:
|
@HelloZeroNet cc 3.0 is perfect for non-code contributions, I first had a thought on that, but forgot add it. |
@HelloZeroNet Added cc 4.0, which is translated to more languages than 3.0, check this pull #2492 |
@HelloZeroNet and you (@canewsin) suggested CC license for documentation. ` Copyright (C) 2000, 2001, 2002, 2007, 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other This License is a kind of "copyleft", which means that derivative We have designed this License in order to use it for manuals for free
This License applies to any manual or other work, in any medium, that A "Modified Version" of the Document means any work containing the A "Secondary Section" is a named appendix or a front-matter section of The "Invariant Sections" are certain Secondary Sections whose titles The "Cover Texts" are certain short passages of text that are listed, A "Transparent" copy of the Document means a machine-readable copy, Examples of suitable formats for Transparent copies include plain The "Title Page" means, for a printed book, the title page itself, The "publisher" means any person or entity that distributes copies of A section "Entitled XYZ" means a named subunit of the Document whose The Document may include Warranty Disclaimers next to the notice which
You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either You may also lend copies, under the same conditions stated above, and
If you publish printed copies (or copies in media that commonly have If the required texts for either cover are too voluminous to fit If you publish or distribute Opaque copies of the Document numbering It is requested, but not required, that you contact the authors of the
You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under A. Use in the Title Page (and on the covers, if any) a title distinct If the Modified Version includes new front-matter sections or You may add a section Entitled "Endorsements", provided it contains You may add a passage of up to five words as a Front-Cover Text, and a The author(s) and publisher(s) of the Document do not by this License
You may combine the Document with other documents released under this The combined work need only contain one copy of this License, and In the combination, you must combine any sections Entitled "History"
You may make a collection consisting of the Document and other You may extract a single document from such a collection, and
A compilation of the Document or its derivatives with other separate If the Cover Text requirement of section 3 is applicable to these
Translation is considered a kind of modification, so you may If a section in the Document is Entitled "Acknowledgements",
You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Document However, if you cease all violation of this License, then your license Moreover, your license from a particular copyright holder is Termination of your rights under this section does not terminate the
The Free Software Foundation may publish new, revised versions of the Each version of the License is given a distinguishing version number.
"Massive Multiauthor Collaboration Site" (or "MMC Site") means any "CC-BY-SA" means the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 "Incorporate" means to publish or republish a Document, in whole or in An MMC is "eligible for relicensing" if it is licensed under this The operator of an MMC Site may republish an MMC contained in the site ADDENDUM: How to use this License for your documents To use this License in a document you have written, include a copy of
If you have Invariant Sections, Front-Cover Texts and Back-Cover Texts,
If you have Invariant Sections without Cover Texts, or some other If your document contains nontrivial examples of program code, we I hope @imachug and @filips123 also fine with this license. |
to anyone concerned : zeronet-conservancy is GPLv3+ for all new contributions . further discussion |
GPLv3+ |
Hello to all previous ZeroNet contributors.
ZeroNet project has recently been informed of some license incompatibilities. Namely, we are using some Apache 2.0 and GPLv3 dependencies, whilst the current ZeroNet license is GPLv2. Thus, I would now ask the contributors to support GPLv3 switch.
A bot is listening on this thread. Please post exactly one of the following 13 comments:
Accepting the first case is recommended: GPLv3 ("and later" or "-only") would be used for ZeroNet core and Lax/Permissive licenses would be used for libraries.
Switching to a Lax/Permissive would require all GPL dependencies to be replaced. Not allowing the switch to a different license (therefore keeping GPLv2) would also require all GPLv3 dependencies, as well as Apache dependencies, to be replaced.
Notice: The term "Lax/Permissive license" used here does not include Public Domain licenses. They do, however, include BSD 2/3, MIT, ISC, and Apache-2.0
Statistics
Contributor list
@shortcutme: Doesn't care@imachug: GPLv3 and Lax@rllola: Doesn't care@tangdou1: GPLv3+@TheNain38: GPLv3-only and Lax@jerry-wolf: GPLv3 and Lax@radfish: Doesn't care@matthewrobertbell: Doesn't care@sirMackk: GPLv3+@Idealcoder: GPLv3@ysc3839: GPLv3+@filips123: GPLv3 and Lax@cclauss: GPLv3+@DaniellMesquita: GPLv3@n3r0-ch: Doesn't care@OliverCole: GPLv3 and Lax@geekless: GPLv3+@cxgreat2014: GPLv3+ and Lax@erqan: Doesn't care@iShift: Doesn't care@mkg20001: GPLv3+ and Lax@krixano: GPLv3 and Lax@Emeraude: Doesn't care@reezer: GPLv3 and Lax@danielquinn: GPLv3+@HostFat: GPLv3@JeremyRand: GPLv3+@volker48: Doesn't care@ppsfassa: Doesn't care@brunogarciavaz: Doesn't care@caryoscelus: GPLv3+@vitorio: GPLv3 and Lax@xfq: GPLv3+ and Lax@6543: GPLv3+ and Lax@ajmeese7: Doesn't care@AceLewis: Doesn't care@megfault: GPLv3 and Lax@zasei: Doesn't care@artemmolotov: Doesn't care@Nephos: Doesn't care@bencevans: GPLv3+@valkheim: GPLv3+@d14na: GPLv3+ and Lax@thesoftwarejedi: Doesn't care@dldx: Doesn't care@camponez: GPLv3+ and Lax@Fil: Doesn't care@gyulaweber: GPLv3+@shakna-israel: Blocking@flibustier: GPLv3 and Lax@kseistrup: GPLv3+@MRoci: GPLv3+@sexybiggetje: GPLv3+ and Lax@BoboTiG: Doesn't care@adrelanos: Doesn't care@quasiyoke: GPLv3 and Lax@Radtoo: GPLv3 and Lax@rubo77: GPLv3 and Lax@SuperSandro2000: Doesn't care@Thunder33345: Lax@anonym: Doesn't care@beigexperience: GPLv3 and Lax@blurHY: GPLv3+@dqwyy: Doesn't care@eduaddad: GPLv3+@goofy-mdn: Lax@mnlg: Doesn't care@mymage: GPLv3 and Lax@probonopd: GPLv3+ and Lax@saber28: GPLv3 and Lax@rwv: Doesn't care@sinkuu: GPLv3 and LaxPassing people
If you're not a contributor but you still want to support this or that option, you can post a comment as well. These comments will appear below.
@skwerlman: GPLv3+ and Lax@0x6a73: GPLv3-only and Lax@CatTheHacker: Lax@blazercrypter: GPLv3-only and Lax@alopexc0de: GPLv3-only and Lax@zeronettimemachine: GPLv3+@ghost: GPLv3+@CyberSecurityEngineer: GPLv3+@USAhas8000PlusNuclearBombForSelfDefense: GPLv3+@George-Soros: GPLv3+@Lambeosaurus: GPLv3+@Kusoneko: GPLv3 and Lax@decentralizedauthority: GPLv3+@canewsin: MIT/BSD2@russianagent: GPLv3+The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: