Re: [dev] [dwm] New software: swm & infobary

From: Chris Down <chris_AT_chrisdown.name>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2024 15:59:45 +0100

NRK writes:
>> > Come on, Chris. The conditions dwm's license imposes is "The above
>> > copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included", not
>> > "Exactly what parts are copied and their authorship shall be indicated"
>> > or whatever. (Or if you are giving that as a condition for granting
>> > relicensing permission, make it clear.)
>>
>> Please learn how MIT licensing works.
>> [...]
>> Restore the Git history, or violate the license: it's as
>> simple as that.
>
>I am of course open to being corrected, but AFAIK there's no requirement
>to keep git history. Only requirement is to keep the license
>file/notice.

I am not a lawyer, so I'll simply leave it at that having no clarity about
which parts are from dwm (and thus are authored under MIT) and which are not is
problematic. Having the git authorship removes this problem. In vendored or
tarballed code, it is not ambiguous.
Received on Sat Oct 26 2024 - 16:59:45 CEST