3 ms·
> It shouldn't be. That's a fundamentally bad idea. I don't think it's that bad of an idea. The MIT license says: The above copyright notice and this perm
by teamhappy 11y ago
> It shouldn't be. That's a fundamentally bad idea.
I don't think it's that bad of an idea. The MIT license says:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
What that means is anybody's guess. I'd say if you include one copy somewhere you're pretty much off the hook.
- teacup50 11y agoA source file is reasonably "a substantial portion"; in fact, a per-file license is applicable to that file, and does not cover other files.
- teamhappy 11y agoYup. I'm saying (guessing, really) the header doesn't necessarily have to stay in the file. You might as well put it somewhere else (e.g., docs, license file). --- Per-file licenses are different. The only one I looked at is MPL2 and IIRC it mentions the little note doesn't have to be in the file.
- JoshTriplett 11y agoIt's theoretically possible to comply with that license while moving the notice elsewhere, sure. However, for the purposes of avoiding situations like this, it's a bad idea. Much easier to just keep the license in the file exactly as it was, and add a header above it if needed.