JuliaLang
Use OSI standard license text
People usually use or used Pkg.jl, PkgDev.jl or PkgTemplates to develop a new package. A common feature is to include by default a LICENSE.md file. This is great. By default most packages would opt into the MIT License (Expat) license with additional metadata (e.g., package name) included and some markdown prettifier (> License text as a quote). However, there are two issues I would like to bring:
- If we choose to keep the current behavior and default to an MIT family license which one should it default to?
- I personally think ISC is a good choice since it just simplifies the text with the latest legal framework.
- Should we keep the metadata and markdown features?
- Here my strong opinion is that we should be using the OSI standard license text. The biggest issue in my opinion is that the current approach is not machine detectable which makes most of the great Julia ecosystem invisible in terms of open source projects (e.g., at least for programmatically analysis such as for the purpose of GitHub and services that rely on it).
Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 59bbd5d5e12aacdf795cce9d97395dfafa0ca387 on Nosferican:License-Standard-Text into f968c69dea24f851d0c7e686db23fa55826b5388 on JuliaLang:master.
How about keeping the line breaks? IIUC GitHub uses licensee to detect the license, and they say they use https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/, which has line breaks. Anyway I hope they don't take them into account in the detection.
I agree with https://github.com/JuliaLang/Example.jl/pull/48#issuecomment-529529144. Why not copy https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/ verbatim?
That's the current PR. The only difference between the MIT OSI standard and the choosealicense text is the header line (68b80c1). For most licenses, they are the same.
No, https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/ has linebreaks, this PR does not.