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

Proposal to change template licensing from Unlicense to MIT-0 #213

Closed
aaronbassett opened this issue Jun 19, 2024 · 2 comments
Closed

Proposal to change template licensing from Unlicense to MIT-0 #213

aaronbassett opened this issue Jun 19, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@aaronbassett
Copy link

Hey folks!

I propose changing the license of the various templates under r0gue control from the Unlicense to MIT-0. While I ideologically agree with the Unlicense, licensing software with the Unlicense can have the opposite effect of the desired goal; it can, in reality, make it impossible for people to use the software freely.

For more information on the problems with the unlicense, please see PR #13465 in the archived substrate repo.

I'm happy to make the required changes and submit PRs, but I wanted to start a discussion first, as this will require changes to several repos:

@AlexD10S
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the suggestion!
After checking out the resources you shared, switching the licenses of our templates to MIT-0 sounds like a great idea:

For r0gue-io/pop-cli we've already decided on the GPL-3.0 license.
As for r0gue-io/pop-node, we still need to determine the most suitable license, so let's hold off on that for now.

@AlexD10S
Copy link
Collaborator

AlexD10S commented Jul 1, 2024

Moved this Issue into the template repository, r0gue-io/base-parachain#31

As mentioned we will change the license for the following repos:
r0gue-io/base-parachain
r0gue-io/assets-parachain
r0gue-io/contracts-parachain
r0gue-io/evm-parachain

@AlexD10S AlexD10S closed this as completed Jul 1, 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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants