I understand that Fish-Net uses a custom license which allows a lot of things. Now when you integrate it in your own project, what license is appropriate for that project? In my case I create an example setup where I use FN and some other tools which run under the MIT or CC0 license. Usually as I understood it my own project should now run under the strictest license (i.e., one which does not allow anything that one of the other used licenses does not) in order to not violate any of the software I implemented. What would that be in this case? Am I allowed to use the GPL3 license for my own project if it includes FN?
#License of own project that includes Fish-Net
short plinth
short plinth
up anyone know how to properly license a project containing FN?
wintry nacelle
@foggy cove
foggy cove
I understand that Fish-Net uses a custom license which allows a lot of things. N...
"Other products of like Software (explicitly networking solutions) may not use, reverse engineer, or implement Software in part or full. Other products not of like Software, such as add-ons, tools, or assets may include, or be created for Software in it's original, unmodified form."
if you arent rebranding FN as a new networking solution, or modifying it in your source available project, use as you like
I think you are looking for this specifically Other products not of like Software, such as add-ons, tools, or assets may include, or be created for Software in it's original, unmodified form.
Unmodified so people can import the latest FN and it will 'just work' with your addons. If a tool/addon needs to modify something in FN to work the correct approach is to just ask us to add it in.
or make a PR
short plinth
I see, so there is no easy way to just distribute my project including FN and have a fitting license for it all? My project is a networking example project for research purposes and those PhD students who are supposed to use it for their learning. I'm a little afraid that I will get lots of questions from students if they import a FN version with even the slightest incompatibilities in the future
wintry nacelle
You could use the FishNet licence for the entire project, or use your other licence and include the FishNet licence for just FishNet itself
short plinth
ah so if I have a license.txt where I say "Fish-Net in this project runs under the Fish-Net license, the rest runs under MIT, see respective files", that would be legal?
wintry nacelle
Should be, yes. GitHub's recommendation was:
One suggestion is to have one LICENSE file for the majority of your code, and add the text of the licenses for the rest of the 3rd party materials in your README file.
Another way is for each path to have its own LICENSE file when it makes sense. So if, for example, your repository has the following path: libs/awesome-lib-v2/ you could have libs/awesome-lib-v2/LICENSE.
In the latter case, you may want to mention that in the README file and/or the LICENSE file in your root.
You may also consider just using one LICENSE file in the root of your repository, and add subsections for any 3rd party material, code, et cetera.
short plinth
I see, thanks for the clarification!
foggy cove
ah so if I have a license.txt where I say "Fish-Net in this project runs under t...
That would be perfect
We aren't really strict about the license thing, it's 99% just to stop other frameworks from blatently taking our code (yes, it happens sadly)
and the keeping FN unmodified as mentioned is the best for both of us. We want your project to survive FN updates, and if you modify FN that probably isnt going to happen.