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

Licensing sign off issue for first time contributors #2096

Closed
24 tasks done
est31 opened this issue Aug 5, 2017 · 25 comments
Closed
24 tasks done

Licensing sign off issue for first time contributors #2096

est31 opened this issue Aug 5, 2017 · 25 comments
Labels
T-core Relevant to the core team, which will review and decide on the RFC.

Comments

@est31
Copy link
Member

est31 commented Aug 5, 2017

This is a sign-off issue as per RFC 2044 (tracking issue) to license the rust-lang/rfcs repo under dual Apache2/MIT licensing terms.

For a discussion on why this move is desired, please see the RFC's text.

You are receiving this notification because you have opened a PR to contribute to this repo.

As you have opened your pull request before PR #2075 was merged, which implicitly assumes from any new PR to include content licensed under these conditions, your contribution might be included without you having agreed to the licensing terms. Also, you are a first-time contributor, which means I didn't include you in my earlier sign off issues for past contributors (#2076, #2077, #2078, #2079).

While smaller changes can't be copyrighted by law, its non-trivial to find out with certainity whether a given change falls under copyright or not, due to the nature of the matter. Therefore I'm asking you to agree to the new terms even if you consider your contributions to be not copyrightable.

Checkoff

To agree to the licensing terms, please comment with:

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

Thank you!

@ishitatsuyuki
Copy link
Contributor

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@XAMPPRocky
Copy link
Member

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

2 similar comments
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Aug 5, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@kennytm
Copy link
Member

kennytm commented Aug 5, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@gnzlbg
Copy link
Contributor

gnzlbg commented Aug 5, 2017 via email

@scalexm
Copy link
Member

scalexm commented Aug 5, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

6 similar comments
@Xaeroxe
Copy link
Contributor

Xaeroxe commented Aug 5, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@cristicbz
Copy link

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@mitsuhiko
Copy link
Contributor

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@schuster
Copy link

schuster commented Aug 5, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@VFLashM
Copy link

VFLashM commented Aug 5, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@clarfonthey
Copy link
Contributor

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@Rufflewind
Copy link

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

@Zoxc
Copy link

Zoxc commented Aug 5, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

7 similar comments
@DemiMarie
Copy link

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@estebank
Copy link
Contributor

estebank commented Aug 6, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@skade
Copy link
Contributor

skade commented Aug 6, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@mgattozzi
Copy link
Contributor

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@Osspial
Copy link

Osspial commented Aug 6, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@cswindle
Copy link

cswindle commented Aug 7, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@ciphergoth
Copy link
Contributor

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@semarie
Copy link

semarie commented Aug 23, 2017

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

2 similar comments
@contactomorph
Copy link

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@dobkeratops
Copy link

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

@est31
Copy link
Member Author

est31 commented Aug 25, 2017

So, everyone has signed off! This means I can close this. Thank you all!

@est31 est31 closed this as completed Aug 25, 2017
@Centril Centril added the T-core Relevant to the core team, which will review and decide on the RFC. label Feb 23, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
T-core Relevant to the core team, which will review and decide on the RFC.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests