Skip to content

Conversation

@AdityaSavara
Copy link

@AdityaSavara AdityaSavara commented Apr 14, 2020

The readme says the software is in the public domain. This pull request makes the license file match that. Below are further details.

**
The readme says the software is in the public domain.
The LICENSE file says it is the MIT license.

Neither of these were added by the navdeep, though the master branch seems to now be the one created by ken-reitz who did add these. Additionally, the readme was recently updated by navdeep:

46f7cd4

From the above, I infer that the correct license should be the Unlicense license. I copied and pasted the text from the github template. Presumably, it is the same as the below link.

https://unlicense.org/

The readme says the software is in the public domain.

The LICENSE file says it is the MIT license.

**Neither** of these were added by the author of the repository.  However, The readme was recently updated by the author of the repository:

navdeep-G@46f7cd4

From the above, I infer that the correct license should be the Unlicense license. I copied and pasted the text from the github template.  Presumably, it is the same as the below link.

https://unlicense.org/
@AdityaSavara
Copy link
Author

@navdeep-G It will be useful if you can personally approve the public domain license pull request. That way people can use this setup.py in federal government work without worry.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant