Should we relicense Xilem and Masonry to the dual MIT/Apache License?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 5.5k
- Forks
- 240
- Avg merge
- 4d 21h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 4
Description
There are a few reasons to do this:
- It's [our default license](https://linebender.org/wiki/formatting-scheme/).
- Some people are interested in having a maximally permissive license.
- Because Masonry is intended to be a foundational crate for most of the ecosystem, a maximally permissive license makes sense.
Any reason not to do this?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Begin by reviewing the three reasons listed in the issue and the current licensing position for Xilem and Masonry. Done means reaching and recording a decision on whether both projects should adopt the dual MIT/Apache license; the payload names no files or tests to run.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- desktop
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100