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 LICENSE (MIT) #77

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

Tachi107
Copy link
Contributor

@Tachi107 Tachi107 commented Dec 5, 2021

Microprofile has been relicensed under the MIT (Expat) license three years ago in commit 2b64aaa, but the README and the LICENSE file have never been updated to reflect the change

Microprofile has been relicensed under the MIT (Expat) license three
years ago in commit 2b64aaa, but the
README and the LICENSE file have never been updated to reflect the
change
@bgermann
Copy link

Actually, the LICENSE file with the Unlicense text was added after the MIT relicensing. So I would guess, the latest version as of now (4.0) licenses the files generally under Unlicense. The demo/ files that have an MIT header are obvously MIT-licensed.

This should really be clarified.

@Tachi107
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not quite. The main header file is clearly licensed under the MIT:

// MIT License
//
// Copyright (c) 2019 Jonas Meyer
//
// Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
// of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
// in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
// to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
// copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
// furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
//
// The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
// copies or substantial portions of the Software.
//
// THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
// IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
// FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
// AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
// LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
// OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
// SOFTWARE.
// ***********************************************************************

@bgermann
Copy link

Yes, that is true for the files with license comment outside the demo dir as well. Those were just an example. However, the files without comment header are not clearly licensed.

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