confusing licence statement / dual licence
Opened this issue · 4 comments
Sure, a licence expert (which simply 9 out of 10 users/developers are not) might figure out we're talking BSD/GPL conform licence here http://github.com/uswaretech/Django-Socialauth/commit/ea105bb6b2cfaab8a9a1134fe350fe920bf1b7b5
The other 9 are probably confused or even worse, scared away ... I'd recommend using one licence and explicitely state so. GPLv3 for example. Then put the standard Licence Text into the LICENCE file ... happy users, happy developers. Happy growing django-socialauth.
No LIcense geek here either. :)
I am actually open to providing Socialauth under any FOSS license, I just relased it under a license which I was trying to play with that day. I dont want to remove a license which we originally released, so if you think this license is confusing, I think I can add another say MIT, license to it.
Opinions?
I suggest GPLv3.
marking as resolved until new release