Change txZMQ (from GPL) to a more permissive license (at least LGPL) about txzmq HOT 19 CLOSED

That occured to me too, but 16 isn't crazy so I skimmed the contributions:

• lvh "contributed" a simple rename so no code there
• the following contributors only modified a file in the examples folder: aleksclark, davidjfelix, stenote, eagafonov
• aleksi's changes were all code style (i.e. whitespace), but they rewrote one block of code in a way that didn't affection functionality.

So strictly speaking,

• You only need approval from 8 other contributors: j0s, jamesharr, mordae, fladi, arnimarj, nnseva ralphbean, and tisdall to relicense the core
• You should ask AlekSi, but could revert that one code change if they object
• If you can get approval from the last 4x (aleksclark, davidjfelix, stenote, eagafonov), you can include the examples. Otherwise, I'd rename this repo txZMQ-gpl and move everything but the examples to a new repo under the new license.

I was going to at-tag all of the critical contributors, but it'll probably be better if it comes from you. I suspect most/all will follow your lead if you advocate for a particular license. If you prefer something very permissive (e.g. BSD), you should probably suggest several options (including LGPL) and ask them to mark any/all that they approve of. That will ensure you can adopt a more permissive license even if some object to the one you suggest.

from txzmq.

This repositoriy is now under MPLv2 and version 1.0.0 released.

from txzmq.

👍 it just took 2.5 years to get there.

I will send a PR to relicense the code under MPLv2 as it's more permissive and it feels like this software is not being widely used.

from txzmq.

A quick update on the progress. Currently, the most permissive license approved by respondents is MPL. LGPL is also still on the table. Here's the status of the approvals (@ tagging the ones we still need):

Must have:

• j0s
• jamesharr (requested a CLA; I'll tweak an existing one if/when we get an OK from the rest of the must haves)
• mordae
• @fladi
• @arnimarj
• nnseva
• ralphbean
• tisdall

Good to Have:

• AlekSi

To relicense examples:

• @aleksclark
• DavidJFelix
• @stenote
• eagafonov

from txzmq.

yep, that was not the best choice for this library, but I don't think it would be easy to change the license today - project has 16 contributors. I have no issues changing the license to anything more permissive given that other contributors agree with their changes being re-licensed

from txzmq.

thanks for the work you did, @ambsw-technology!

So, let's start the vote here on re-licensing. ZeroMQ itself is licensed under LGPL + static link exception, and they plan to move to more permissive MPL v2. As txZMQ is fairly straightfoward wrapper around ZeroMQ, I don't think it should have a license which is more strict than ZeroMQ.

There are three options for txZMQ as I see:

1. Relicense under LGPL (more strict)
2. Relicense under MPLv2 (more permissive)
3. Keep it under GPL.

My vote is to go with MPLv2.

I would like to ask all the past contributors to respond whether you're okay to relicense your contribution under LGPL/MPLv2. You can either accept both options, one of them, or tell that license change is not acceptable for your, so you would like to see your work kept under GPL.

Thanks.

Contributors:

• @j0s

• @jamesharr

• @mordae

• @fladi

• @arnimarj

• @nnseva

• @ralphbean

• @tisdall

• @AlekSi

• @aleksclark

• @DavidJFelix

• @stenote

• @eagafonov

from txzmq.

👍 for any option, up to you.

from txzmq.

I'm partial to MIT for it's permissiveness, but I relinquish my rights over my contributions to @smira to choose a license. Twisted seems to use an MIT license.

from txzmq.

I'm also fine with any of the options.

from txzmq.

Any option is fine, but I'd prefer LGPL.

from txzmq.

from txzmq.

Send me a CLA or release and I'll sign it to allow for any relicense of my contribution. If you asked me what I preferred? MIT or Apache2.

from txzmq.

Both LGPL and MPL are fine for me.

from txzmq.

approved

from txzmq.

I approve both options: LGPL/MPLv2

from txzmq.

Any option is fine, but I'd too prefer LGPL.

from txzmq.

Hi. I'm happy with any of the options.

from txzmq.

I approve LGPL or MPLv2

from txzmq.

Thanks all. All code contributors have OK'd LGPL and MPLv2. One of the example contributors has not responded and another has requested a CLA.

IANAL but tisdall (a code-level contributor) delegated the choice to @smira so smira will need to decide which of the two (or both) are approved. At that point, someone can move the examples to a separate repo and update the license in this repo.

I'm no longer using this package so I'm going to unsubscribe, but I'm ecstatic that smira now has the flexibility to release it under more accessible license(s).

from txzmq.