Question about license notice.

[lemmaa]

Hi, I'm Sung-Jae Lee, a leader of IoT.js project. IoT.js was inspired from node.js and referenced basic architecture and some parts of codes from this project to implement node.js compatible API for IoT. Recently, we realized that we had missing license notification for referenced code by accident, and trying to correct it. (jerryscript-project/iotjs#326)

In my understanding from https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/LICENSE, all the source codes in https://github.com/nodejs/node/tree/master/src are under 'node.js license', the first section of LICENSE file. So I appended the 'node.js license' notice to https://github.com/Samsung/iotjs/blob/master/LICENSE, but I can't sure it is sufficient.

So, I leave a question here. Please let me know if I have to do something more.

I'm really appreciate to all the contribution of node.js community in open source.
Thank you in advance! :)

[rvagg]

Thanks @lemmaa. The state of our LICENSE is in a little bit of flux at the moment with the exact form that the top part of the file under question and currently in the hands of the legal representatives of the Node.js Foundation. It's a work in progress but being tracked here: #3979.

Be patient with us but we'll leave this issue open and track it in #3979 and report back when we have an answer. I'll make sure we get answers from the legal folks to your exact question because it's probably something we should have a clue about!

[lemmaa]

Thanks @rvagg. We also leave our issue open and following your guide.

[mikeal]

@lemmaa update from the Foundation.

Please do not modify copyright lines. It is actually a violation of the MIT license.

If you are making local modifications under your own copyright please add your copyright line below the original.

Also, as a side note, be sure to include the copyright notice and the MIT license in the documentation for any hardware you ship with this code running on it.

[jasnell]

Is there reason to leave this one open?