I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

@Aceeri @cooperra @csherratt @nchashch @Oflor The source code is changing at a growing rate, and we need everyone on this list to chime in whether you support this transition. This has been sitting here for far too long now, we should arrive at a consensus ASAP.

from amethyst.

@thiolliere Thanks for pointing this out! I didn't really think about patent trolls and explicit contribution licensing when I first started the project, since I wasn't really sure if people were interested in helping or not. This seems like a good idea to me. Hopefully everyone else agrees.

Contributor checkoff

To agree to relicensing, comment with :

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

Or, if you're a contributor (looks like GitHub only shows contributors to master), you can check the box in this repo next to your name.

• @Aceeri
• @cooperra
• @csherratt
• @ebkalderon
• @Emilgardis
• @lschmierer
• @LucioFranco
• @msiglreith
• @nchashch
• @Oflor
• @palodequeso
• @serprex
• @White-Oak

from amethyst.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

@Emilgardis @lschmierer @LucioFranco @Oflor @palodequeso @serprex @White-Oak Please respond to this thread whether you support the licensing change or not. As contributors to this repository, your input is very valuable, and this thread cannot be closed until you chime in. Thanks!

from amethyst.

My contribution to amethyst was pretty minor and I hope i can contribute more :), but, nevertheless, I checked myself in in that list.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

My contribution to amethyst was pretty minor and I hope i can contribute more :), but, nevertheless, I checked myself in in that list.

Ditto, although I've recently started looking into adding SteamVR support again. :)

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

from amethyst.

@msiglreith @Oflor Please chime in on whether you agree or disagree with this relicensing initiative! Thank you.

from amethyst.

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option

from amethyst.

It seems like @Oflor hasn't been active in a long time.

from amethyst.

Anyone doing work for the relicense? Seems like everyone is onboard. master on amethyst/website also needs to be changed to state that we are dual-licensed

from amethyst.

I can do this later if no one else wants to.

from amethyst.