undefined | Better HN

0 pointspalata11mo ago0 comments

Right. So Microsoft should just have a copy of this LICENSE file somewhere? Can't we just open a PR to add it to the repo? Did the author do that and did Microsoft decline the PR?

Feels like Microsoft was not necessarily trying to steal work (they link the original project in their README).

0 comments

johnisgood11mo ago

I think as a bare minimum, they should have kept the original LICENSE, and add theirs on top or something.

Conan_Kudo11mo ago

It needs to be present in the headers of each file that they took from. Attribution matters and in mixed projects you need that clarification at the file level.

palataOP11mo ago

Does the MIT licence text say that? I don't understand it like this. I understand that a copy of the licence should be preserved, not that the licence should be copied into source files.

aksss11mo ago

I think the fork needs to preserve the LICENSE file in the repo and in distributed code (e.g. packages), right? But not replicated as a file header in every blessed file in the repo.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse