Repository navigation
chore: dual-license under Apache-2.0 or MIT - #14
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
Fine with me |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Similarly to uutils/num-prime#53, this PR proposes dual-licensing the project under MIT OR Apache-2.0.
The goal is to improve compatibility with downstream projects and make the crate easier to use in ecosystems that prefer the MIT license, while keeping the current Apache-2.0 terms available as well.
Would all contributors agree to this?
cc: @tyilo @cmpute @skaunov