Re-license to Apache-2.0/MIT by CAD97 · Pull Request #71 · TeXitoi/structopt

CAD97 · 2018-02-17T21:31:48Z

This requires check-off from the following people:

You may copy-paste the following message to provide permission for the re-licensing:

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

CAD97 · 2018-02-17T21:32:17Z

I changed the header comments where they exist to the standard Apache-2.0 one. I did not add them where they don't. This is the de-facto Rust license, and sidesteps potential issues with WTFPL.

The main reason for this is to help clap_derive avoid license issues.

CAD97 · 2018-02-17T21:35:05Z

One more ping for @bestouff, you said you'd post the blurb once you had the correct place to put it.

killercup · 2018-02-17T21:35:59Z

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

Kerollmops · 2018-02-17T22:06:39Z

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

Flakebi · 2018-02-17T22:28:12Z

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

TeXitoi

A big thank you for that!

TeXitoi · 2018-02-17T23:09:31Z

@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+# Unreleased
+
+* Re-licensed to Apache-2.0/MIT


Please add your name as in all the changelog lines.

TeXitoi · 2018-02-17T23:10:08Z

+// distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+// WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+// See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+// limitations under the License.


Please use something explicitly dual licensing as https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/libstd/lib.rs#L1-L9

TeXitoi · 2018-02-17T23:14:56Z

@@ -1 +0,0 @@
-../COPYING


Please symlink the LICENSE-* files in this directory as asked in #61

I'm on Windows, and this appeared as just a text file for me (and GitHub apparently).

The easiest (and common) solution is just to duplicate the license files, so unless you come up with a better idea that works through Git, I'll just do that (in a separate commit).

Copying the files is OK for me.

It's done now! 👍

Great, approved.

SergioBenitez · 2018-02-17T23:29:47Z

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

kennytm · 2018-02-17T23:41:46Z

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

bestouff · 2018-02-18T06:51:54Z

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

CAD97 · 2018-02-18T06:53:22Z

We get it @bestouff 😆 (You seem to have octuple posted)

bestouff · 2018-02-18T07:30:14Z

Sorry, did it from FastHub (It's early morning here) which gave back a "server error" each time. I've deleted the useless comments.

williamyaoh · 2018-02-18T07:42:01Z

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

ski-csis · 2018-02-19T06:39:38Z

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

CAD97 · 2018-02-19T23:53:08Z

Well, that was relatively painless! All the code contributors have signed off, just tshepang to go with a minor doc change to permit the re-license. To be honest, their contribution seems (very) minor enough that the re-license could go on without their permission if they don't step forward for or against. But IANAL so don't take that as legal advice please, I just know enough to organize things, not make the judgement calls.

I'd give @tshepang the rest of the week to step forward to yay/nay the re-license, but not block on it.

TeXitoi

You have to change the header of examples/deny_missing_docs.rs and update the conflicts in CHANGELOG.md.

TeXitoi · 2018-02-23T22:19:49Z

I let @tshepang until Sunday to validate.

I'll merge and do the new release on Monday even without the validation. (if @BurntSushi doesn't veto on it)

BurntSushi · 2018-02-23T22:21:39Z

@TeXitoi 👍 Thanks!

TeXitoi · 2018-02-24T14:30:19Z

 keywords = ["clap", "cli", "derive", "docopt"]
 categories = ["command-line-interface"]
-license = "WTFPL"
+license = "Apache-2.0/MIT"


Please change that to MIT OR Apache-2.0 as in https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/blob/master/Cargo.toml#L7

@TeXitoi Actually Apache-2.0/MIT is the correct syntax. See https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/manifest.html#package-metadata.

# This is a string description of the license for this package. Currently # crates.io will validate the license provided against a whitelist of known # license identifiers from http://spdx.org/licenses/. Multiple licenses can be # separated with a `/`. license = "..."

OK. My bad. Strange that cargo doesn't validate its own format.

CAD97 · 2018-02-25T00:10:40Z

Merged in missing_docs fix with 3f5b7ab, includes replacing the header as appropriate.

CAD97 · 2018-02-25T00:12:38Z

Or... maybe that chunk didn't get added. Now 182ea23 does what I thought I had done 😆

tshepang · 2018-02-25T01:55:53Z

I permit any contribution submitted for inclusion in StructOpt by me, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, to be dual-licensed under Apache-2.0/MIT.

CAD97 · 2018-02-25T04:51:07Z

All clear @TeXitoi! 🎉🎉🎉🎉

TeXitoi · 2018-02-25T10:26:22Z

v0.2.4 published.

Thanks to everybody!

Separate licenses with a `/` instead of ` OR ` It's what we tell others to do. https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/manifest.html#package-metadata > ```toml > # This is a string description of the license for this package. Currently > # crates.io will validate the license provided against a whitelist of known > # license identifiers from http://spdx.org/licenses/. Multiple licenses can be > # separated with a `/`. > license = "..." > ``` Noted [here](TeXitoi/structopt#71 (comment)). This should either use `/` or a note should be added that ` OR ` is allowed as a combination operator.

Re-license to Apache-2.0/MIT

667bb05

CAD97 mentioned this pull request Feb 17, 2018

Dual License? clap-rs/clap_derive#8

Closed

4 tasks

TeXitoi requested changes Feb 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

CAD97 added 3 commits February 17, 2018 18:22

Link my GH account in README

f63f96d

Use custom dual-license header based on Rust's

fab9004

Copy licenses to structopt-derive

97073ac

TeXitoi approved these changes Feb 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

TeXitoi mentioned this pull request Feb 23, 2018

can't compile : missing documentation for method structopt::clap::App #74

Closed

TeXitoi requested changes Feb 23, 2018

View reviewed changes

TeXitoi mentioned this pull request Feb 24, 2018

Panic with nested subcommands and tuple struct variants #76

Closed

TeXitoi requested changes Feb 24, 2018

View reviewed changes

Merge missing_docs fix

182ea23

CAD97 mentioned this pull request Feb 25, 2018

Separate licenses with a / instead of OR rust-lang/cargo#5074

Merged

TeXitoi approved these changes Feb 25, 2018

View reviewed changes

TeXitoi merged commit 72784f3 into TeXitoi:master Feb 25, 2018

		@@ -1 +0,0 @@
		../COPYING No newline at end of file

Conversation

CAD97 commented Feb 17, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

CAD97 commented Feb 17, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

CAD97 commented Feb 17, 2018

Uh oh!

killercup commented Feb 17, 2018

Uh oh!

Kerollmops commented Feb 17, 2018

Uh oh!

Flakebi commented Feb 17, 2018

Uh oh!

TeXitoi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

TeXitoi Feb 17, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

SergioBenitez commented Feb 17, 2018

Uh oh!

kennytm commented Feb 17, 2018

Uh oh!

bestouff commented Feb 18, 2018

Uh oh!

CAD97 commented Feb 18, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bestouff commented Feb 18, 2018

Uh oh!

williamyaoh commented Feb 18, 2018

Uh oh!

ski-csis commented Feb 19, 2018

Uh oh!

CAD97 commented Feb 19, 2018

Uh oh!

TeXitoi left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

TeXitoi commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

BurntSushi commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

CAD97 commented Feb 25, 2018

Uh oh!

CAD97 commented Feb 25, 2018

Uh oh!

tshepang commented Feb 25, 2018

Uh oh!

CAD97 commented Feb 25, 2018

Uh oh!

TeXitoi commented Feb 25, 2018

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

CAD97 commented Feb 17, 2018 •

edited

Loading

CAD97 commented Feb 17, 2018 •

edited

Loading

TeXitoi Feb 17, 2018 •

edited

Loading

CAD97 commented Feb 18, 2018 •

edited

Loading

TeXitoi left a comment •

edited

Loading