@webbrain-one — a small housekeeping request, and thanks for #151.
What I'm asking
I'm moving quil from the MIT licence to the Apache License 2.0, and I'd like your permission to include your contribution under it.
Your change in #151 (7328d6e) added two rows to the README's documentation table. It's small enough that it may well not carry copyright at all — but you're one of only two people other than me with a commit in the tree, and asking is cheaper than deciding on your behalf.
Why Apache-2.0
Three things MIT is silent on: a patent grant from contributors, a requirement that modified distributions mark which files they changed, and an explicit statement that the licence covers the code and not the project's name.
It's also where the category has settled — aider, goose, cline and continue are Apache-2.0, and the MCP Go SDK quil depends on is mid-transition to it from MIT.
What doesn't change
Apache-2.0 is OSI-approved and permissive. quil stays open source and free to use, fork, modify and redistribute. You keep your copyright — this is a licence grant, not an assignment. No CLA, nothing becoming proprietary.
The proposed change is on the chore/apache-2-relicense branch if you want to look first.
How to answer
If you agree, a comment with this line is enough:
I grant permission to relicense my contributions to quil under the Apache License, Version 2.0.
If you'd rather not, no problem at all — say so and I'll simply rewrite those two lines, which takes a minute and leaves your contribution history untouched.
Thanks.
@webbrain-one — a small housekeeping request, and thanks for #151.
What I'm asking
I'm moving quil from the MIT licence to the Apache License 2.0, and I'd like your permission to include your contribution under it.
Your change in #151 (
7328d6e) added two rows to the README's documentation table. It's small enough that it may well not carry copyright at all — but you're one of only two people other than me with a commit in the tree, and asking is cheaper than deciding on your behalf.Why Apache-2.0
Three things MIT is silent on: a patent grant from contributors, a requirement that modified distributions mark which files they changed, and an explicit statement that the licence covers the code and not the project's name.
It's also where the category has settled — aider, goose, cline and continue are Apache-2.0, and the MCP Go SDK quil depends on is mid-transition to it from MIT.
What doesn't change
Apache-2.0 is OSI-approved and permissive. quil stays open source and free to use, fork, modify and redistribute. You keep your copyright — this is a licence grant, not an assignment. No CLA, nothing becoming proprietary.
The proposed change is on the
chore/apache-2-relicensebranch if you want to look first.How to answer
If you agree, a comment with this line is enough:
If you'd rather not, no problem at all — say so and I'll simply rewrite those two lines, which takes a minute and leaves your contribution history untouched.
Thanks.