Skip to content
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

chore: update licenses #149

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Aug 2, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
5 changes: 5 additions & 0 deletions licenses/license-engine.sh
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -13,6 +13,8 @@ ALLOWED_LICENSES=(
'Apache-2.0'
'Apache License, Version 2.0'
'Apache*'
'Artistic-2.0'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems like this is used by npm already, which we obviously use and also distribute (via docker images) extensively, so this should be fine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artistic_License

'BlueOak-1.0.0'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It seems like this is fine, because it is intended as an easier to read alternative to MIT: https://blueoakcouncil.org/license/1.0.0

And looking at the dependencies, it looks like it would be pretty hard to remove the affected packages.

'BSD'
'BSD*'
'BSD-2-Clause'
Expand All @@ -25,9 +27,12 @@ ALLOWED_LICENSES=(
'CC-BY-4.0'
'(CC-BY-4.0 AND MIT)'
'ISC'
'ISC*'
'LGPL-2.1' # LGPL allows commercial use, requires only that modifications to LGPL-protected libraries are published under a GPL-compatible license
'MIT'
'MIT*'
'MIT-0'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Removes attribution from MIT: https://github.com/aws/mit-0

'MIT AND ISC'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since both MIT and ISC are fine, these should be fine, too.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Jonas did the work. I just quickly reviewed the licenses, and it looks good.

'(MIT AND BSD-3-Clause)'
'(MIT AND Zlib)'
'(MIT OR Apache-2.0)'
Expand Down
Loading