No license file

Bug #1245206 reported by Olivier Teulière on 2013-10-27
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
UltiSnips
Fix Committed
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

Under what license is UltiSnips code? The LICENSE file is missing.

SirVer (sirver) wrote :

I am curious. Why are you asking this question?

I have to look into this a little.

Changed in ultisnips:
status: New → Incomplete
SirVer (sirver) wrote :

I added a copying.txt file into the repo.

Changed in ultisnips:
status: Incomplete → Fix Released
status: Fix Released → Fix Committed
Olivier Teulière (ipkiss-0) wrote :

Thank you for adding the file.

To satisfy your curiosity: there is a policy at my work, where tools need to get some before approval before we can ue them. A tool with no license has no chance to be approved, that's why I requested it.
It turns out that a GPLv3 license also has almost no chance to get approved, but that's my problem, not yours :-/

One more question though: does the license cover only the plugin code, or also the snippets? It seems that the snippets (or at least an older version of them) are present in the honza/vim-snippets repository, which is explicitly covered by the MIT license...

Is there any hope to have the whole UltiSnips package covered by a dual GPLv3/MIT license?

SirVer (sirver) wrote :

honza/vim-snippets is a separate repository with the same roots (snipMate snippets basically). snipMate did not specify a license when I got the snippets from there.

To use a tool you need a MIT license? That seems broken, you are not reusing any code.

The engine is GPL now which is fair to the contributors (you can just not check it into your internal repositories I think). The snippets are public domain as far as I am concerned - MIT license is covered with this too. I do not know how to make this clear in the license file though. If you wip together a pull request making this distinction clear, I'll gladly merge it.

What place are you working at? It seems wrong to forbid simply using tools that are not BSD/MIT licensed.

Olivier Teulière (ipkiss-0) wrote :

You are right that I don't intend to reuse/modify your code at all, just use it. I already use Ultisnips at home, and I am quite happy with it.

I never said I needed a MIT license to use a tool: if that was the case, I couldn't even use Vim which has its own license :). This was just an example of license that would be fine for me. I suggested it because it was the one used in honza/vim-snippets. Other (actually many) licenses would stand a much better chance to get approved than GPLv3, including other versions of GPL.
It might seem broken, but I don't have the possibility to change the rules anyway...

About my job, I believe that a bug report is not an appropriate place to discuss it, sorry :)

SirVer (sirver) wrote :

I am sorry that the license does not fit well for you. I think it is the right choice for the project as it stands right now though. And about your job - no worries, was just curious. :)

Olivier Teulière (ipkiss-0) wrote :

Fair enough. Thanks for the quick replies.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers