Support on LC about awesome-cv HOT 6 CLOSED

I cannot understand abbreviations in your message.
What is LC and OP?

Is there any problem cuz of MIT License and my copyright? I need more explanations!

from awesome-cv.

LC => Latex community
OP => original poster

You might want to add an explicit license info into the files. Alltough, personally, i think that MIT and other very open licenses aren't the best choice, as explained in my two opening comments in https://github.com/VelNZ/mastersdoctoralthesislatex/issues/6

from awesome-cv.

Thanks for your kindness. I changed a License type by your suggestion! LPPL for class file, CC for LaTeX template.

Thanks!

from awesome-cv.

Hi guys,

I concur that MIT is not always the most appropriate choice but CC BY-NC-SA for the resume template seems a little restrictive given that:

• Awesome-CV is itself a derivative work of FancyCV
• Awesome-CV is used in a couple commercial spots already.
• LPPL explicitly allows commercial use.

Is there any reason not to use LPPL across the board or go with CC BY SA, preserving attribution but allowing for commercial use?

Thanks!

from awesome-cv.

Hi, I agree with your opinion, sorry for my lack of understanding about LICENSE. I changed License type for LaTeX template from CC BY-NC-SA to CC BY-SA.

Thanks to all of you !

from awesome-cv.

Thanks @posquit0! -- this project has re-sparked my interest in LaTeX and it's been fun.

from awesome-cv.