3 ms·
Which is fine, and surely an honest mistake. Automation is great, but the way I see it is, how many other projects have been forked and automatically re-license
by gizdan 5y ago
Which is fine, and surely an honest mistake. Automation is great, but the way I see it is, how many other projects have been forked and automatically re-licensed, and then profited from without proper attribution? An accident still needs to be flagged, and still needs to be corrected. They also need to be learned from and avoided in the future.
- xyproto 5y agoAttribution is nice, but for it to be a requirement, it needs to either be specified in the license or be plain old copyright.
- wongarsu 5y agoThe license clearly states > Permission is hereby granted [...] subject to the following conditions: > The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. Changing the name in the copyright is a clear license violation.
- xyproto 5y agoYes, I agree.
- CyberShadow 5y ago> An accident still needs to be flagged, and still needs to be corrected. Yes. Additionally, the way such actions are performed is not great because the mechanism used does not provide any way to provide feedback - if the change was done by a user account, then they would have received notifications about the comments posted under the commit, but the ones received by the service account probably go nowhere.