Repository navigation
Use the MIT License only - #62
Merged
Merged
Conversation
The repository shipped two conflicting licence files: LICENSE (MIT) and COPYING (GNU GPL v3). Keep MIT: - Remove COPYING. - Remove the prebuilt `vata` executable from the repository root. Nothing in the build, tests or scripts uses it, and it came with no source or licence information. - Add a License section to the README. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_013gtFQRPe1eSSpmA7EJ2KNY
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #60.
Summary
The repository had two licence files that disagreed:
LICENSE(MIT) andCOPYING(GNU GPL v3). The project goes with MIT, so this PR:COPYING;vataexecutable at the repository root (added in 47e640e). Nothing in the build, the tests or the scripts uses it. The only mention of VATA, inunit_tests/reference_answers/artifact_evaluation.sh, points to an external libvata build. The binary also came with no source or licence information;LICENSE.LICENSEis unchanged.Older source files
Some source files carry their original copyright lines with no licence named:
include/autoq/simulation/binary_relation.hhand the other simulation headers;include/autoq/autoq.hhandinclude/autoq/aut_description.hh.Both authors agree to these files being distributed under MIT, so they need no change here. A later PR could add an
SPDX-License-Identifier: MITline to the source headers.Also for the maintainers to decide:
LICENSEnames only "Copyright (c) 2023 Wei-Lun Tsai". You may want it to name all AutoQ authors, or "the AutoQ authors".🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_013gtFQRPe1eSSpmA7EJ2KNY