Permission to change code license to MIT?

[jrgp]

Hi Everyone. I'm the author of this project, and would like to relicense all files from GPL to MIT, so the project becomes more permissive and more usable for everyone.

However, I need an explicit "YES" from each person who has contributed code. Is everyone okay with this?

• @jrgp
• @FroggDev
• @LeeBradley
• @mologie
• @matriphe
• @doublehelix
• @filisko
• @FliesLikeABrick
• @Shark-kun
• @IndrekHaav
• @gpedro
• @Kaotic
• @rsauvatinet
• @Beaten-Sect0r
• @dbwiddis
• @KTP95
• @chraac
• @evazzadeh
• @Gummibeer
• @Gemorroj

[IndrekHaav]

Yes

[filisko]

Yes!

[Gemorroj]

Yes

[Gummibeer]

Yes

[Gummibeer]

@jrgp use GitHub Checkboxes to keep track in first post/comment.
https://help.github.com/articles/about-task-lists/

[jrgp]

@Gummibeer cool, thanks

[Shark-kun-zz]

Yes

[remisauvat]

Yes Rémi Sauvat iNet Process remi.sauvat@inetprocess.com

…

On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, 7:33 pm Mikhail, ***@***.***> wrote: Yes — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#82 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABfAd8YOxFpkL5tw8EoDac99S0MSuH3Wks5ti8ltgaJpZM4S-_v7> .

[gpedro]

Yes Atenciosamente, Gabriel Pedro

…

Em 28 de mar de 2018, às 13:35, Rémi Sauvat ***@***.***> escreveu: Yes Rémi Sauvat iNet Process ***@***.*** On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, 7:33 pm Mikhail, ***@***.***> wrote: > Yes > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#82 (comment)>, or mute > the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABfAd8YOxFpkL5tw8EoDac99S0MSuH3Wks5ti8ltgaJpZM4S-_v7> > . > — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[ameliabradley]

Yes

[Beaten-Sect0r]

Yes

[mologie]

Yes

[matriphe]

Yes

[dbwiddis]

Yes

[JohnAdib]

Yes;)

[chraac]

Yes

[doublehelix]

YES

…

On 29 March 2018 at 03:50, Joe Gillotti ***@***.***> wrote: Hi Everyone. I'm the author of this project, and would like to relicense all files from GPL to MIT, so the project becomes more permissive and more usable for everyone. However, I need an explicit "YES" from each person who has contributed code. Is everyone okay with this? @FroggDev <https://github.com/FroggDev> @LeeBradley <https://github.com/leebradley> @mologie <https://github.com/mologie> @matriphe <https://github.com/matriphe> @doublehelix <https://github.com/doublehelix> @filisko <https://github.com/filisko> @FliesLikeABrick <https://github.com/FliesLikeABrick> @Shark-kun <https://github.com/Shark-kun> @IndrekHaav <https://github.com/IndrekHaav> @gpedro <https://github.com/gpedro> @Kaotic <https://github.com/Kaotic> @rsauvatinet <https://github.com/rsauvatinet> @Beaten-Sect0r <https://github.com/Beaten-Sect0r> @dbwiddis <https://github.com/dbwiddis> @KTP95 <https://github.com/KTP95> @chraac <https://github.com/chraac> @evazzadeh <https://github.com/evazzadeh> @Gummibeer <https://github.com/Gummibeer> @Gemorroj <https://github.com/Gemorroj> — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#82>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAVrOmorXfkYy6e0heW3xQqbAnyTm0aAks5ti79PgaJpZM4S-_v7> .

-- Q: Why is this email three sentences or less? A: http://three.sentenc.es

[FroggDev]

Yes ^_^

[jrgp]

Thanks everyone for the confirmations :)

We're currently just waiting on approval from:
@KTP95
@gpedro
@Kaotic

[jrgp]

Just cut the first release in a long time, and hopefully the last one GPL'd: https://github.com/jrgp/linfo/releases/tag/v3.0.2

Once I have all approvals, I think I'll do a major version bump for the migration to MIT.

[ameliabradley]

@jrgp gpedro shows up here as having responded affirmatively

[jrgp]

Yep, looks like it's just @KTP95 and @Kaotic left

[dbwiddis]

The change by @Kaotic was a simple typo fix. Worst case you can back out their change, then re-fix it yourself without fear of treading on anyone's intellectual property. :)

The change by @KTP95 is only slightly more complex; it could be backed out for the change and requested to be resubmitted under the new license.

[jrgp]

Good point. Those are both really trivial.

[ameliabradley]

I believe a one-character bug fix is not copyrightable. There's some interesting discussion about this topic on StackOverflow.

And I agree with @dbwiddis on how to handle KTP95's change.

[Gummibeer]

@LeeBradley the link is interesting - related to this the change by @KTP95 isn't copyrightable at all cause there is nearly nö other way to get this done.
A callable check is needed in a __call overloading to another class to prevent exceptions. So the change, except of codestyle, couldn't ne done in any other mentionable way.

@jrgp the idea you have wouldn't be a solution for a Copyright protected change except you really change the code. What would be pretty hard If you know the done solution.

So I would say that all Copyright contributors have accepted and the remaining two don't have contributed any changes in request for Copyright.

[dbwiddis]

Of note, @KTP95 also posted the code as a comment in #50 and only submitted the PR upon request -- was there a license on his Issue comment.

Also of note, the nearly-identical code is posted as part of a question and in an answer on StackOverflow.

[jrgp]

Done. Linfo 4.0.0 released, under MIT instead of GPL.

[hrieke]

You might have missed a file or two in the relicensing:
https://github.com/jrgp/linfo/blob/master/layout/scripts.js

[jrgp]

You might have missed a file or two in the relicensing:

https://github.com/jrgp/linfo/blob/master/layout/scripts.js

Thanks for letting me know. I'll fix this later.