Hi — thanks for this fork. XBRW++ started from your code rather than from the original, and a good deal of what I inherited is yours.
I maintain XBRW++, a fork of this repository. In getting it ready to hand to other people I hit a licensing problem that runs the whole length of the chain: neither this repository nor terminaldisclaimer/XBRecipeWriter has a licence.
No LICENSE file, no license field in package.json, no statement in either README. As I understand it, the default applies and each of you retains all rights to your own contributions. GitHub's terms cover viewing and forking within GitHub, but not redistribution or shipping a derivative elsewhere. So my fork can't be licensed either — I can't grant rights over code I didn't write.
I've opened the same request upstream. That one is the bigger blocker, since everything descends from it. But your own additions need a grant too, so I'm asking here as well.
Would you be willing to add a licence?
I'd suggest MIT, to match what I've proposed upstream and what essentially every dependency in the project already uses. Keeping the whole chain on one licence makes it far simpler for anyone downstream. It asks very little of you: your copyright notice is preserved, and you give no warranty.
Happy to open a PR with the file if that's easier — just say the word and which licence you'd like.
I'm not asking for code, review, maintenance, or any involvement in my fork. Just the licence, if you're willing.
XBRW++ credits you by name on its About screen as the author of the fork it grew out of, and that's the case either way.
Thanks for considering it.
Hi — thanks for this fork. XBRW++ started from your code rather than from the original, and a good deal of what I inherited is yours.
I maintain XBRW++, a fork of this repository. In getting it ready to hand to other people I hit a licensing problem that runs the whole length of the chain: neither this repository nor terminaldisclaimer/XBRecipeWriter has a licence.
No
LICENSEfile, nolicensefield inpackage.json, no statement in either README. As I understand it, the default applies and each of you retains all rights to your own contributions. GitHub's terms cover viewing and forking within GitHub, but not redistribution or shipping a derivative elsewhere. So my fork can't be licensed either — I can't grant rights over code I didn't write.I've opened the same request upstream. That one is the bigger blocker, since everything descends from it. But your own additions need a grant too, so I'm asking here as well.
Would you be willing to add a licence?
I'd suggest MIT, to match what I've proposed upstream and what essentially every dependency in the project already uses. Keeping the whole chain on one licence makes it far simpler for anyone downstream. It asks very little of you: your copyright notice is preserved, and you give no warranty.
Happy to open a PR with the file if that's easier — just say the word and which licence you'd like.
I'm not asking for code, review, maintenance, or any involvement in my fork. Just the licence, if you're willing.
XBRW++ credits you by name on its About screen as the author of the fork it grew out of, and that's the case either way.
Thanks for considering it.