Timeline for What's the usual procedure when using MIT or BSD-2-Clause licensed source code with something like `<script src="…`, `require(…` or `import …`?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 7, 2020 at 7:10 | comment | added | Bart van Ingen Schenau | @geekley, the MIT license notice must be included "in all copies or substantial portions of the Software". "the Software" is not individual files, so the requirement can be satisfied by ensuring an existing LICENSE file remains with the other files. | |
| S Aug 7, 2020 at 7:05 | history | suggested | geekley | CC BY-SA 4.0 | MIT and BSD quotes were swapped in the question |
| Aug 7, 2020 at 1:51 | comment | added | geekley | "If the individual (source) files don't contain a comment block with the license text or a reference to the license, then you are not required to change that". I can see that in BSD which says "must retain", but the phrasing in MIT is "shall be included". Wouldn't that make it required if you're serving MIT code (source or compiled) from someone else on your server? | |
| Aug 7, 2020 at 1:41 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Aug 7, 2020 at 7:05 | |||||
| Dec 3, 2018 at 20:28 | vote | accept | finefoot | ||
| Jan 28, 2018 at 8:12 | history | answered | Bart van Ingen Schenau | CC BY-SA 3.0 |