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: add more accepted licenses #155

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jonas-jonas
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@jonas-jonas jonas-jonas self-assigned this Dec 30, 2024
@@ -48,6 +48,9 @@ ALLOWED_LICENSES=(
'(WTFPL OR MIT)'
'(MIT OR WTFPL)'
'LGPL-3.0-or-later' # Requires only that modifications to LGPL-protected libraries are published under a GPL-compatible license which is not the case at Ory
'Apache-2.0 AND MIT'
'(Apache-2.0 OR MPL-1.1)'
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure if this is okay. We pull in a dep that uses this dual license model, through an MIT licensed module.

└─┬ @nx/[email protected]
  └─┬ [email protected]
    └── [email protected]

(@nx/jest is MIT licensed: https://www.npmjs.com/package/@nx/jest)
So I think this is fine!

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is known as dual licensing and as long as it's OR it should be fine:

Dual licensing offers two distinct license options. When a project uses something like (Apache-2.0 OR MPL-1.1), you pick one of them and follow its terms. If you distribute the software under Apache-2.0, you comply with Apache-2.0 requirements. If you choose MPL-1.1, you comply with MPL-1.1 requirements.

@aeneasr
Copy link
Member

aeneasr commented Dec 30, 2024

Closing in favor of feat: more dual licenses

@aeneasr aeneasr closed this Dec 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants