CodeEditApp / CodeEditApp/CodeEditLanguages
License clarification: which license governs CodeEditLanguages?
- 主要语言
- Swift
- 星标
- 133
- 派生
- 55
- PR 合并指标
- 30 天内没有已合并 PR
描述
Hi, and thanks for maintaining CodeEditLanguages — bundling the tree-sitter grammars into a single precompiled xcframework is a genuinely clean way to consume tree-sitter on macOS.
I'd like to depend on this package in a commercial macOS app and want to attribute it correctly, but I can't determine the license for **this specific package**: there's no `LICENSE` file in the repo root, and GitHub's license API returns nothing for it. The main CodeEdit app is MIT, but `CodeEditLanguages` doesn't appear to carry its own license file.
Could you help clarify:
1. **What license governs `CodeEditLanguages` itself?** Is it intended to be MIT, consistent with the rest of the CodeEdit org? If so, would you consider adding a `LICENSE` file to the repo root so it's unambiguous and detectable by tooling (GitHub, SPM, license scanners)?
2. **Attribution for the bundled grammars** — each upstream tree-sitter grammar carries its own license (MIT/Apache-2.0/etc.). Is there an aggregate `NOTICE`/attribution you'd recommend bundling, or should consumers attribute each grammar from its upstream repo?
Happy to open a PR adding a `LICENSE` file (and a grammar `NOTICE`, if useful) if that would save you time. Thanks again!
贡献指南
这个仓库没有索引到贡献指南
调研方向
Start by checking the repository root for the missing LICENSE file and reviewing how the bundled tree-sitter grammars and their upstream licenses are identified. Confirm the package’s governing license and the needed grammar attribution with maintainers; done means the repository contains the agreed LICENSE and, if needed, a NOTICE or documented attribution guidance.
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
评估
- 技术栈
- swift
- 领域
- documentation
- Issue 类型
- 文档
- 难度
- 4/5
- 预计耗时
- 3-5 天
- 活跃度
- 冷清
- 描述清晰度
- 基本清楚
- 新手友好度
- 35/100