MIT license

[mistic]

@jindw @bigeasy Can't we simple use an MIT only license here?

If you think it's not possible, can we add at least 2 different license files one LICENSE.MIT and another LICENSE.LGPL-2.0 so we can have the license checkers automatically detecting this?

[adrukh]

I'd like to piggy-back this issue and point out a discrepancy I'm seeing on the published package on npmjs.com:

The package.json file (commit 0be2ae9) states:

"license": "(LGPL-2.0 or MIT)"

However, installing the package from npm (version 0.1.27) has this in its package.json:

  "licenses": [
    {
      "type": "LGPL",
      "url": "http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html",
      "MIT": "http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT"
    }
  ],

I'd expect two objects in the licenses array, one for LGPL-2.0, the other for MIT. The single object above seems broken - type and MIT don't make sense bundled together in a single licenses object.

Can this be addressed? Perhaps with npm support?

[mistic]

I believe a big part of the problem is related with the way the license files are included in the repo. Add them as 2 different license files one LICENSE.MIT and another LICENSE.LGPL-2.0 should solve the problem.

[brody4hire]

Seems to be fixed in master by PR #178 but never released