You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The GNU LGPLv2.1 is more suited for libraries, and I'm not sure this is the license we want for this project.
We should give the most freedom to everyone without any problems, as long as they give credit.
What do you think about relicensing the whole project under MIT? It's a much more permissive license as well as simple and short. I'm not a lawyer, but I think we need to ask all the contributors to agree to relicense the project under a different license (in this case, MIT).
Contributors that have agreed to relicensing under MIT
Description
The GNU LGPLv2.1 is more suited for libraries, and I'm not sure this is the license we want for this project.
We should give the most freedom to everyone without any problems, as long as they give credit.
What do you think about relicensing the whole project under MIT? It's a much more permissive license as well as simple and short. I'm not a lawyer, but I think we need to ask all the contributors to agree to relicense the project under a different license (in this case, MIT).
Contributors that have agreed to relicensing under MIT
Let me know if you agree to this below. Thanks! 🙂
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: