keywords
keywords copied to clipboard
leighmcculloch
Repo License
Hello, I would like to reuse a fork of this repo in a project and was wondering what license this is released under, if any.
It doesn't have a license. Unfortunately I didn't include a license, and since multiple people have contributed since then, I believe I would need to request permission from all contributors to add a license. I guess we can try and do that though, no harm in trying.
Thank you! What license would you like to go for, in case the contributors are in agreement?
Also cc'ing people who I found in the closed PRs tab to see whether they'd be okay with licensing their contributions:
- [x] @adsouza (https://github.com/leighmcculloch/keywords/pull/9 and https://github.com/leighmcculloch/keywords/pull/3)
- [ ] @kryskool (https://github.com/leighmcculloch/keywords/pull/5)
- [x] @yene (https://github.com/leighmcculloch/keywords/pull/6)
- [x] @trin94 (https://github.com/leighmcculloch/keywords/pull/4)
(Also cc'ing @e3b0c442 whose fork I was referring to in my original message :smiley: )
re: the fork, this is a bit hairy legal-wise because I never actually ended up using any of the original code or data that @leighmcculloch and contributors compiled, as can be seen in https://github.com/e3b0c442/keywords/commit/74adb73b6293627f783782ac0da0be76bc484215; I think doing so was my original intent in making the fork, but then I got myself down a caffeine-fueled rabbit hole.
That said, I did start with a fork, I want to make sure @leighmcculloch is credited for the original idea, and I will happily comply with the upstream licensing decisions, but if I'm licensing my own work in isolation I would choose MIT for the code and CC-BY-4.0 for the compiled data.
Thanks for bringing this up, it's a good reminder to people like me that see cool things and want to build on them that we need to pay attention to licensing (or lack thereof).
@cakiki Maybe best to open an issue on @e3b0c442's fork requesting a license be added to it. Looks like the fork is more its own creation, and not a modification of this repo. I'm still happy to add an MIT license to this repo if the contributors all respond acknowledging such, but I don't think it solves your problem.
