Relicense under dual MIT/Apache-2.0

[emberian]

This issue was automatically generated. Feel free to close without ceremony if you do not agree with re-licensing or if it is not possible for other reasons. Respond to @cmr with any questions or concerns, or pop over to #rust-offtopic on IRC to discuss.

You're receiving this because someone (perhaps the project maintainer) published a crates.io package with the license as "MIT" xor "Apache-2.0" and the repository field pointing here.

TL;DR the Rust ecosystem is largely Apache-2.0. Being available under that license is good for interoperation. The MIT license as an add-on can be nice for GPLv2 projects to use your code.

Why?

The MIT license requires reproducing countless copies of the same copyright header with different names in the copyright field, for every MIT library in use. The Apache license does not have this drawback. However, this is not the primary motivation for me creating these issues. The Apache license also has protections from patent trolls and an explicit contribution licensing clause. However, the Apache license is incompatible with GPLv2. This is why Rust is dual-licensed as MIT/Apache (the "primary" license being Apache, MIT only for GPLv2 compat), and doing so would be wise for this project. This also makes this crate suitable for inclusion and unrestricted sharing in the Rust standard distribution and other projects using dual MIT/Apache, such as my personal ulterior motive, the Robigalia project.

Some ask, "Does this really apply to binary redistributions? Does MIT really require reproducing the whole thing?" I'm not a lawyer, and I can't give legal advice, but some Google Android apps include open source attributions using this interpretation. Others also agree with it. But, again, the copyright notice redistribution is not the primary motivation for the dual-licensing. It's stronger protections to licensees and better interoperation with the wider Rust ecosystem.

How?

To do this, get explicit approval from each contributor of copyrightable work (as not all contributions qualify for copyright) and then add the following to your README:

## License

Licensed under either of
 * Apache License, Version 2.0 ([LICENSE-APACHE](LICENSE-APACHE) or http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0)
 * MIT license ([LICENSE-MIT](LICENSE-MIT) or http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT)
at your option.

### Contribution

Unless you explicitly state otherwise, any contribution intentionally submitted
for inclusion in the work by you, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, shall be dual licensed as above, without any
additional terms or conditions.

and in your license headers, use the following boilerplate (based on that used in Rust):

// Copyright (c) 2016 handlebars-rust developers
//
// Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0
// <LICENSE-APACHE or http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0> or the MIT
// license <LICENSE-MIT or http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT>, at your
// option. All files in the project carrying such notice may not be copied,
// modified, or distributed except according to those terms.

Be sure to add the relevant LICENSE-{MIT,APACHE} files. You can copy these from the Rust repo for a plain-text version.

And don't forget to update the license metadata in your Cargo.toml to:

license = "MIT/Apache-2.0"

I'll be going through projects which agree to be relicensed and have approval by the necessary contributors and doing this changes, so feel free to leave the heavy lifting to me!

Contributor checkoff

To agree to relicensing, comment with :

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option

Or, if you're a contributor, you can check the box in this repo next to your name. My scripts will pick this exact phrase up and check your checkbox, but I'll come through and manually review this issue later as well.

• [x] @sunng87
• [x] @blaenk
• [x] @untitaker
• [x] @tailhook
• [x] @chris-morgan
• [x] @BurntSushi
• [ ] @AlexTalker
• [ ] @Eric-Guo
• [x] @freiguy1
• [x] @hugoduncan
• [x] @SkylerLipthay
• [x] @ihrwein
• [x] @TimNN

[tailhook]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option

[chris-morgan]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

(Full stop! The sentence needs a full stop at the end of it!)

[untitaker]

I give permission to Ning Sun (sunng87) to license my contributions to handlebars-rust or handlebars-iron under any OSI-approved license.

On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 04:28:11PM -0800, Chris Morgan wrote:

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

(Full stop! The sentence needs a full stop at the end of it!)

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sunng87/handlebars-rust/issues/55#issuecomment-170168472

[sunng87]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[ihrwein]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[TimNN]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[BurntSushi]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[freiguy1]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 8:33 AM Andrew Gallant [email protected] wrote:

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/sunng87/handlebars-rust/issues/55#issuecomment-170243789 .

[blaenk]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[SkylerLipthay]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[rustonaut]

What is the current state of this?

Expect @hugoduncan, @Eric-Guo and @AlexTalker every agreed. (Through by now there should be more people, which have to agree).

So I wonder if:

1. it makes sense to get this agreement with any new pull request
2. [maybe] if @hugoduncan, @Eric-Guo and @AlexTalker can't be reached to retrospectively remove their contribution (which sounds a bit extreme but somehow thing should be re-licensed). All of this contributions where not major so it should be viable (typo, impl Disply/Error on the old error type, typo + making a example look nicer).

Through the decision probably should be made after getting the permission from all contributors since the list above was made in 2016.

(Also note that 2. probably should be done through a rebase to be on the safe side, which means any fork has to then rebase their changes on-top of the new head, which is slightly annoying, but at last github shows forks so all people which forked can be notified))

---

Just to be on the clear side, all contributions are appreciated, it is just that I thing moving to dual licensing is important and this was the only practical thing I came up with if people can't be reached.

[tailhook]

MIT license allows sublicensing, which means you can use this work under a different license, just retain the copyright. So permission from all contributor isn't strictly required (as I think it's implied that they were licensing their work under MIT too). Am I misunderstanding the license?

[emberian]

Yes, that's not what sublicensing means.

On Fri, Jul 13, 2018, at 16:43, Paul Colomiets wrote:

MIT license allows sublicensing, which means you can use this work under a different license, just retain the copyright. So permission from all contributor isn't strictly required (as I think it's implied that they were licensing their work under MIT too). Am I misunderstanding the license?

-- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sunng87/handlebars-rust/issues/55#issuecomment-404980205

-- cmr http://octayn.net/ +16038524272

[hugoduncan]

I just noticed this. You have my permission to re-license my contributions under any license you choose.

Hugo Duncan

On 13 Jul 2018, at 20:11, Corey Richardson [email protected] wrote:

Yes, that's not what sublicensing means.

On Fri, Jul 13, 2018, at 16:43, Paul Colomiets wrote:

MIT license allows sublicensing, which means you can use this work under a different license, just retain the copyright. So permission from all contributor isn't strictly required (as I think it's implied that they were licensing their work under MIT too). Am I misunderstanding the license?

-- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sunng87/handlebars-rust/issues/55#issuecomment-404980205

-- cmr http://octayn.net/ +16038524272 — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[sunng87]

Added new contributors to the table.

Name	Status
sunng87	Agreed
@softprops	Pending
blaenk	Agreed
@gamebox	Aggred
tailhook	Agreed
untitaker	Agreed
@killercup	Agreed
@FauxFaux	Agreed
@robinst	Agreed
@ignatenkobrain	Agreed
@azerupi	Agreed
@SirVer	Agreed
dathinab	Agreed
@frewsxcv	Agreed
@GuillaumeGomez	Agreed
@mschmo	Pending
@rofrol	Pending
@SergioBenitez	Agreed
@shepmaster	Agreed
@eliovir	Pending
@bbigras	Agreed
@ghotiphud	Agreed
@KalitaAlexey	Pending
TimNN	Agreed
SkylerLipthay	Agreed
chris-morgan	Agreed
@AlexTalker	Pending
hugoduncan	Agreed
freiguy1	Agreed
BurntSushi	Agreed
@Eric-Guo	Pending

[killercup]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[GuillaumeGomez]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[igor-raits]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[robinst]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[azerupi]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[frewsxcv]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[ghotiphud]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[bbigras]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[shepmaster]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[gamebox]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[FauxFaux]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[SirVer]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[SergioBenitez]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[paulzhang5511]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.

[Eric-Guo]

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to chose either at their option.