4 ms·
Literally the main point of this blog post: >The project’s binary distributions didn’t include the required MIT license notice for the llama.cpp code they were
by msm_ 3mo ago
Literally the main point of this blog post:
>The project’s binary distributions didn’t include the required MIT license notice for the llama.cpp code they were shipping. This isn’t a matter of open-source etiquette, the MIT license has exactly one major requirement: include the copyright notice. Ollama didn’t.
- inigyou 3mo agoHow sure are we that it didn't include the notice? There isn't any prescribed form or location for the notice, so you're trying to prove a negative.