5 ms·
Very interesting! Sadly, their code does not seem to have a license. Hopefully they will correct that soon. No one gets to opt out of laws, and the default laws
by dwheeler 8y ago
Very interesting! Sadly, their code does not seem to have a license. Hopefully they will correct that soon. No one gets to opt out of laws, and the default laws don't really let you do anything.
- dooglius 8y agoThere is a license section in the readme
- dwheeler 8y agoThanks! That helps, but doesn't answer the question. This part is very helpful: > Files we created are licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0, viewable at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0, and are marked as such. This part makes it useless: > Code borrowed from other sources keeps the original copyright and license. What are those licenses? If they used a package manager I could just see that (a nice easy list). As it is, I can't tell what rights and requirements I have.
- frankmcsherry 8y agoIn case you are sincerely interested, the literal very next section enumerates which other projects they borrow from and their corresponding directories in the repo. I'm sure you can come back with "the xv6 dependence is underspecified" or whatever, but maybe let's wait until it turns out you actually want to use any of this before getting excited about your troubles with the licensing.