I'm thinking of creating and publishing a library with my own features and designs based on the libraries published under the MIT license, so should I follow the license of the library I referenced and how should I list the licenses?
As for the source code itself, there are approximately 10 lines of functions (except comments and variable names) left in the 900 lines of reference source code.The main source of reference is the aforementioned library, but there is also another library of the same kind that was used as a design reference.We have not moved the implementation itself just by looking at how it is implemented.
If the original source code is partially modified and published, the original license must be listed, but I don't know how to determine.
license mit-license
It's more legal than technical, so I think it's better to consult an intellectual property expert for a detailed decision.However, it doesn't seem so severe, so I will answer as far as I can understand.
Only 10 lines in common with the original source code do not invalidate the copyright, so you will need to display it according to the license of the original source code.Also, if the current source code is the result of modifying the original source code, you should consider it a derivative of the original source code, even if many modifications result in no trace of the original source code.
As for those who "looked at how they implemented it and used it as a reference," it's only case by case, and people will judge, but it's safe to follow the original source code license for now.
In any case, MIT licenses are one of the most restrictive licenses, and there should be little inconvenience if affected by them.If the original source code is GPL, you have to be very careful about so-called GPL contamination, but if it's a MIT license, you can follow it for now.
If so, how should I list the licenses?
This is described in the body of the MIT license.For reference only,
The above copyright notice and this Permit shall be included in all copies or important parts of the Software.
http://osdn.jp/projects/opensource/wiki/licenses%2FMIT_license
So I copied the entire license display of the original source code and added it to the Readme or the manual, and said, "This software uses a library called 〇 と."Below is the license display for the library called 〇 と."""
"
About License Descriptions when Importing Open Source Code-Browser Creation
An interesting description was introduced in for your reference.
The sock_readline() function is:
Copyright (c) 1999 Eric S. Raymond
Permission is hereby graded, free of charge, to any person
obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
(omitted)
After a little research, it seems to be the copyright notation written in Neon's src/socket.c which is the WebDAV client library.In recent Neon, sock_readline() seems to have been rewritten, so I can't see the above description, but it says Neon 0.5.1 or something like that.
http://www.webdav.org/neon/history.html
In addition to the beginning of the file, it was also mentioned in the actual quotation.
/* This is from Eric Raymond's fetchmail (SockRead() in socket.c)
* since I wouldn't have a clear how to do it properly.
* This function is Copyright 1999(C) Eric Raymond.
* Modifications Copyright 2000(C) Joe Orton
*/
int sock_readline (nsocket* sock, char*buf, intlen)
{
Without licensing reasons, the origin of the piece of code may be useful when viewed later.
© 2024 OneMinuteCode. All rights reserved.