Relicense under MIT?

[Panquesito7]

Description

The GNU LGPLv2.1 is more suited for libraries, and I'm not sure this is the license we want for this project. We should give the most freedom to everyone without any problems, as long as they give credit.

What do you think about relicensing the whole project under MIT? It's a much more permissive license as well as simple and short. I'm not a lawyer, but I think we need to ask all the contributors to agree to relicense the project under a different license (in this case, MIT).

Contributors that have agreed to relicensing under MIT

Let me know if you agree to this below. Thanks! 🙂

• [x] @Perelyn-sama
• [x] @mkubdev
• [x] @wenceslas-sanchez
• [x] @Panquesito7 (me)
• [ ] @priyda
• [ ] @Chiadikaobixo
• [ ] @0xfps
• [ ] @rifqij
• [x] @0xSumitBanik
• [ ] @sreekar9601
• [ ] @Yash9276
• [ ] @Yash2934
• [x] @Adi9876
• [x] @samuel-rl
• [ ] @akhil484
• [x] @xeno097
• [ ] @RohitSingh107
• [ ] @poorvadiwan

[Panquesito7]

I'm going to assume the 👍 is a yes. Let me know if I'm wrong, though. Thanks.

[Adi9876]

Agree

On Sun, 11 Feb 2024, 06:38 David Leal, @.***> wrote:

I'm going to assume the 👍 is a yes. Let me know if I'm wrong, though. Thanks.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/TheAlgorithms/Solidity/issues/89#issuecomment-1937379529, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AO7PIG5Y44FASVQSUKVZS4DYTAKXHAVCNFSM6AAAAABDCHFOCOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSMZXGM3TSNJSHE . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[0xSumitBanik]

Agreed.

[wenceslas-sanchez]

sgtm

[xeno097]

Agree