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
Looking around this repository, coming from someone who never looked at it before, I'm having trouble identifying the license that applies to the entire codebase.
Am I correct to guess that this file: https://github.com/vusec/ridl/blob/master/tool/LICENSE is applicable to all code in this repository (excluding the git submodules, of course), or does it only apply to the code in that tool directory?
If the latter, is the code found in the other folders then unlicensed, meaning regular copyright applies to it?
If the first, should this file maybe be moved to the top directory so that both Github and visiting viewers can identify what license this repository is under?
So it would probably be advisable to add a license header to every source file that the MPL is applied to in this codebase:
/* This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public
* License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this
* file, You can obtain one at https://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. */
Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Looking around this repository, coming from someone who never looked at it before, I'm having trouble identifying the license that applies to the entire codebase.
Am I correct to guess that this file: https://github.com/vusec/ridl/blob/master/tool/LICENSE is applicable to all code in this repository (excluding the git submodules, of course), or does it only apply to the code in that
tool
directory?If the latter, is the code found in the other folders then unlicensed, meaning regular copyright applies to it?
If the first, should this file maybe be moved to the top directory so that both Github and visiting viewers can identify what license this repository is under?
Another thing, it seems to me the MPL requires the license notice to be attached in some way to every file it is applied to: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/2.0/FAQ/#header-locations
So it would probably be advisable to add a license header to every source file that the MPL is applied to in this codebase:
Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: