-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 142
license: json-pure? #277
Comments
Besides Alex Chesters's copyright statement is missing... |
This will have to be answered by @stephencelis as he was the one who added that fragment to the What do you mean by |
GHI embeds a JSON-parsing library when compiled into a single file. A quick search on GitHub would have brought you here: https://github.com/genki/json We should, however, be able to remove |
@stephencelis, are you able to answer @onlyjob's query? |
Where is |
As far as adding Alex to the LICENSE file, that's really up to him ;) Typically licenses remain bound to the original author/owner of the code, though I'm fine adding more people to it as they contribute as much as Alex has! |
@AlexChesters It's embedded here: https://github.com/stephencelis/ghi/blob/master/lib/ghi/json.rb I'd experiment with removing it entirely, seeing what breaks, and replace the requires with |
I agree with @stephencelis that licenses remain bound to the original author/owner of the code, and given that I currently have no desire to put myself in the On the second point I'm planning to do what @stephencelis has suggested re |
Once/If #278 gets merged this issue will be resolved. |
Thanks for quick replies everyone. :)
Well that copyright statement is missing in the LICENSE file. A something like
I see that there are many contributors but no copyrights are documented... Bundled copy of json.rb should be better documented as it is difficult to identify it in source tree due to lack of licensing information. It would be great to mention its origin (e.g. project URL). Bundled |
@onlyjob json-pure and its reference in the LICENSE are to be removed.
LICENSE files and copyrights do not document every contributor to a project. |
Thanks. :) |
This has now been closed, as
|
Thanks. Lack of contributor's copyright statements is not ideal but should be acceptable... |
As far as I'm aware it's uncommon to list contributors in the LICENSE file, so I think that's why we've decided against it here |
It is not that uncommon to list copyrights of significant contributors in LICENSE and there is already one contributor listed. It is convenient when copyright information is in one place. Sometimes LICENSE file is reserved for canonical text of the license with list of copyright holders in README. |
Anyway, I feel like we're getting carried away here. I have no desire to maintain copyright attribution so that's the main reason why the LICENSE file only contains Stephen's name |
Fair enough, let's move on for now. Thanks. |
@AlexChesters, may I ask you to tag json-less release please so I could upload it to Debian? |
The following fragment of
LICENSE
file is ambiguous:Please clarify which part of ghi is copyrighted as above. Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: