3 ms·
There is nothing unclear about it: they took a permissively licensed piece of code (MIT), then relicensed it under a copyleft license (GPL). (Then possibly/pres
by jenny91 4y ago
There is nothing unclear about it: they took a permissively licensed piece of code (MIT), then relicensed it under a copyleft license (GPL). (Then possibly/presumably made changes to that GPL codebase.)
The MIT license gives you a right to sublicense to your heart's content.
- tyingq 4y agoI provided a link from people that would know, and it includes phrases like: "A more complicated case occurs when a developer makes copyrightable changes to a permissive-licensed file that the developer is incorporating into a GPL’d program" "Note, however, that in a single source file it is typically very difficult, and often completely infeasible, to determine which parts of such a file are covered by permissive terms." The point being that perhaps you can relicense it, but does that accomplish what you want...making some particular part of it fully bound by the GPL? That's the complicated part.
- jenny91 4y agoYour link is about projects that mix licenses between files. This is just taking the full project wholesale and relicensing the whole thing under GPL.