New answers tagged


Instead of a license, the SQLite source code offers a blessing: May you do good and not evil May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others May you share freely, never taking more than you give. You can add it at the bottom of the license, it has no legal value.


It probably depends on how you intend to distribute your software but I expect that it won't be very useful, to say the least. Normally, free software is distributed as source code archives. (Other projects – or you yourself – might pick those archives up and create “installable” distribution files for their respective package manager from them.) If you ...


There is a key difference between an issue tracker and the repository itself: The issue tracker isn't distributed with the repository When one downloads the library or does a git clone, the license that the library and code is distributed under needs to be there. Consider the situation where someone had their code on Google ...


You may incorporate any code that has a compatible license to it. That said, unless the new code is specifically licensed under a compatible license if you are to pull the changes into your codebase, you are opening yourself up to the possibility of some difficulties. In particular, unless the code specifically states that the new contributions are under a ...


If there is BSD licensed source code and someone forks it adding additional patches, then this new source code in the new repo should include the exact BSD license file from the original repo and the new patches should be licensed under a new license (or the even the same license). Thus, the fork should have one or two licenses in the repository. It isn't ...


Angular Materials is in violation of the CSS specification ("@media" must be followed by one or more identifiers, which may not contain null, separated by commas and whitespace, which also may not contain null, followed by an open brace), and as such no other vendor has any obligation whatsoever to support it. As such, your only recourse is to either report ...


The boilerplate notice for the Apache License is: Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner] Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at Unless required by applicable ...


On the very page of the Apache 2.0 license, it is explained how to include a boilerplate notice into the comment section of your work. This notice is sufficient to inform any users of their rights and obligations in regards to your work.


Yes, that is what it means. However, it is recommended that you already include that second file with a copy of the license, just to avoid that a (potential) user of your software needs to go to a different site (which might be down or unreachable from their location) to read what their rights and obligations are.

Top 50 recent answers are included