Relicense Bevy under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 #2373

cart · 2021-06-22T03:06:33Z

What?

We would like to relicense Bevy under the "dual MIT / Apache-2.0 license". This allows users to select either license according to their own preferences. There are Very Good Reasons for this (see the "Why?" section below). However I can't just arbitrarily relicense open source code, despite being the maintainer / lead developer. Bevy has hundreds of contributors and they all agreed to license their contributions exclusively under our current instance of the MIT license.

If you are mentioned in this issue, we need your help to make this happen

To agree to this relicense, please read the details in this issue, then leave a comment with the following message:

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

If you disagree, please respond with your reasoning (just don't expect us to change course at this point). Anyone who doesn't agree to the relicense will have any Bevy contributions that qualify as "copyrightable" removed or re-implemented.

Why?

I originally chose to license Bevy exclusively under MIT for a variety of reasons:

People and companies generally know and trust the MIT license more than any other license. Apache 2.0 is less known and trusted.
It is short and easy to understand
Many people aren't familiar with the "multiple license options ... choose your favorite" approach. I didn't want to scare people away unnecessarily.
Other open source engines like Godot have had a lot of success with MIT-only licensing

However there were a variety of issues that have come up that make dual-licensing Bevy under both MIT and Apache-2.0 compelling:

The MIT license (arguably) requires binaries to reproduce countless copies of the same license boilerplate for every MIT library in use. MIT-only engines like Godot have complicated license compliance rules as a result
The Apache-2.0 license has protections from patent trolls and an explicit contribution licensing clause.
The Rust ecosystem is largely Apache-2.0. Being available under that license is good for interoperation and opens the doors to upstreaming Bevy code into other projects (Rust, the async ecosystem, etc).
The Apache license is incompatible with GPLv2, but MIT is compatible.

Additionally, Bevy's current MIT license includes the Copyright (c) 2020 Carter Anderson line. I don't want to force Bevy users to credit me (and no one else) for the rest of time. If you agree to the relicense, you also agree to allow us to remove this copyright line crediting me.

What will this look like?

After getting explicit approval from each contributor of copyrightable work
(as not all contributions qualify for copyright, due to not being a "creative
work", e.g. a typo fix), we will add the following file to our README:

### License

Licensed under either of

 * Apache License, Version 2.0, ([LICENSE-APACHE](LICENSE-APACHE) or http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0)
 * MIT license ([LICENSE-MIT](LICENSE-MIT) or http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT)

at your option.

### Contribution

Unless you explicitly state otherwise, any contribution intentionally submitted
for inclusion in the work by you, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, shall be dual licensed as above, without any
additional terms or conditions.

We will add LICENSE-{MIT,APACHE} files containing the text of each license. We will also update the license metadata in our Cargo.toml to:

license = "MIT OR Apache-2.0"

Contributor checkoff

Contributors with "obsolete" changes (no need for approval)

adekau
ColonisationCaptain
temhotaokeaha

Contributors with "trivial" changes that are ok to keep

follower
HyperLightKitsune
liufuyang
Raymond26
themilkybit
walterpie
EthanYidong

Contributors with changes we reverted to unblock the relicense

TomBebb

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

zicklag · 2021-06-22T03:10:22Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

YohDeadfall · 2021-06-22T03:14:07Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

cart · 2021-06-22T03:17:16Z

I will now mention people in chunks of 50, as that is the max number of mentions per message.

ColdIce1605 · 2021-06-22T03:17:18Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

cart · 2021-06-22T03:17:28Z

@0x22fe
@8bit-pudding
@aclysma
@adam-bates
@adamaq01
@adekau
@aevyrie
@ak-1
@akiross
@alec-deason
@alexb910
@alexschrod
@alice-i-cecile
@AlisCode
@aloucks
@amberkowalski
@AmionSky
@anchpop
@andreheringer
@andrewhickman
@AngelicosPhosphoros
@AngelOnFira
@Archina
@ashneverdawn
@BafDyce
@bgourlie
@BimDav
@bitshifter
@bjorn3
@blaind
@blamelessgames
@blunted2night
@Bobox214
@Boiethios
@bonsairobo
@BoxyUwU
@Byteron
@CAD97
@CaelumLaron
@caelunshun
@cart
@CGMossa
@CleanCut
@ColdIce1605
@ColonisationCaptain
@Cupnfish
@dallenng
@Dash-L
@Davier
@dburrows0

cart · 2021-06-22T03:17:51Z

cart · 2021-06-22T03:18:09Z

cart · 2021-06-22T03:18:23Z

cart · 2021-06-22T03:18:35Z

@tarkah
@TehPers
@Telzhaak
@termhn
@the-notable
@thebluefish
@themilkybit
@TheNeikos
@TheRawMeatball
@thirdsgames
@Tiagojdferreira
@tigregalis
@TomBebb
@Toniman20
@toothbrush7777777
@TotalKrill
@tristanpemble
@trolleyman
@turboMaCk
@undinococo
@verzuz
@Veykril
@VitalyAnkh
@w1th0utnam3
@W4RH4WK
@walterpie
@Waridley
@Weibye-Breach
@wilk10
@will-hart
@willcrichton
@WilliamTCarroll
@woubuc
@wyhaya
@Xavientois
@YohDeadfall
@yrns
@zaszi
@zgotsch
@zicklag
@Zooce

bonsairobo · 2021-06-22T03:18:57Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

adam-bates · 2021-06-22T03:19:12Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

frewsxcv · 2021-06-22T03:19:56Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

OptimisticPeach · 2021-06-22T03:20:25Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

wyhaya · 2021-06-22T03:20:29Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

aevyrie · 2021-06-22T03:20:43Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

robertwayne · 2021-06-22T03:20:48Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

alice-i-cecile · 2021-06-22T03:22:41Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

zgotsch · 2021-06-22T03:22:46Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

will-hart · 2021-06-22T03:23:10Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Cupnfish · 2021-06-22T03:23:26Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

gcoakes · 2021-06-22T03:24:38Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option. To go a step further, you can do so for any other license you might add in the future.

I think I only bumped a dependency in Cargo.toml. Makes me laugh, the idea that you would have to "reimplement" that. It would be like claiming plagiarism for the phrase, "in conclusion."

joshuajbouw · 2021-06-22T03:25:23Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Jerald · 2021-06-22T03:25:46Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

CleanCut · 2021-06-22T03:26:12Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

Waridley · 2021-06-22T03:27:24Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

fintelia · 2021-06-22T03:30:29Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

JohnDoneth · 2021-06-22T03:30:50Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

jak6jak · 2021-06-22T03:30:56Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

zmerp · 2022-04-22T09:15:38Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

TheArchitect4855 · 2022-04-22T15:25:50Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

nihohit · 2022-04-25T14:20:16Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

The5-1 · 2022-04-25T17:51:04Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

…gine#4252) This reverts commit 08ef2f0. # Objective - bevyengine#4225 was merged without considering the licensing considerations. - It merges in code taken from https://github.com/cart/ecs_bench_suite/tree/bevy-benches/src/bevy. - We can safely assume that we do have a license to cart's contributions. However, these build upon cart/ecs_bench_suite@377e96e, for which we have no license. - This has been verified by looking in the Cargo.toml, the root folder and the readme, none of which mention a license. Additionally, the string "license" [doesn't appear](https://github.com/rust-gamedev/ecs_bench_suite/search?q=license) in the repository. - This means the code is all rights reserved. - (The author of these commits also hasn't commented in bevyengine#2373, though even if they had, it would be legally *dubious* to rely on that to license any code they ever wrote) - (Note that the latest commit on the head at https://github.com/rust-gamedev/ecs_bench_suite hasn't had a license added either.) - We are currently incorrectly claiming to be able to give an MIT/Apache 2.0 license to this code. ## Solution - Revert it

KirmesBude · 2022-07-30T14:46:12Z

I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.

…gine#4252) This reverts commit 08ef2f0. # Objective - bevyengine#4225 was merged without considering the licensing considerations. - It merges in code taken from https://github.com/cart/ecs_bench_suite/tree/bevy-benches/src/bevy. - We can safely assume that we do have a license to cart's contributions. However, these build upon cart/ecs_bench_suite@377e96e, for which we have no license. - This has been verified by looking in the Cargo.toml, the root folder and the readme, none of which mention a license. Additionally, the string "license" [doesn't appear](https://github.com/rust-gamedev/ecs_bench_suite/search?q=license) in the repository. - This means the code is all rights reserved. - (The author of these commits also hasn't commented in bevyengine#2373, though even if they had, it would be legally *dubious* to rely on that to license any code they ever wrote) - (Note that the latest commit on the head at https://github.com/rust-gamedev/ecs_bench_suite hasn't had a license added either.) - We are currently incorrectly claiming to be able to give an MIT/Apache 2.0 license to this code. ## Solution - Revert it

cart added C-Feature A new feature, making something new possible S-Needs-Triage This issue needs to be labelled labels Jun 22, 2021

This was referenced Apr 22, 2022

Fixed sprite transparency artifacts #2428

Closed

XR support with OpenXR backend #2319

Closed

This was referenced Apr 25, 2022

Implemented a priority executor for bevy_task #2167

Closed

Add a few transform convenience methods #2055

Closed

[Merged by Bors] - Fix mouse_clicked check for touches. #2029

Closed

Debug Draw #1625

Closed

aevyrie mentioned this issue Jun 6, 2022

Relicense bevy_mod_picking under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 aevyrie/bevy_mod_picking#138

Closed

DJMcNab mentioned this issue Jun 10, 2022

[Merged by Bors] - Note that changes to licensing are controversial #4975

Closed

pka mentioned this issue Jul 21, 2022

Relicence according to LASzip laz-rs/laz-rs#35

Closed

JonahPlusPlus mentioned this issue Aug 1, 2022

Relicense bevy_atmosphere under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 JonahPlusPlus/bevy_atmosphere#21

Merged

5 tasks

alice-i-cecile mentioned this issue Oct 20, 2022

Add SquarePrism shape into mesh #377

Closed

TheButlah mentioned this issue Nov 25, 2022

Relicense SlimeVR under Dual MIT + Apache 2.0 license SlimeVR/SlimeVR-Server#308

Closed

42 tasks

jsinger67 mentioned this issue Feb 2, 2023

Is it possible to consider a dual license model MIT/Apache 2.0 for rflex? pfnet/rflex#16

Open

AngelOnFira mentioned this issue Feb 23, 2023

[DISCUSSION] Relicense Ambient under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 AmbientRun/Ambient#160

Closed

philpax mentioned this issue Mar 29, 2023

Relicense as MIT/Apache2 rustformers/llm#92

Closed

badcodecat mentioned this issue Nov 9, 2023

Dual licencse under Apache 2.0 and MIT appybara13/pxo#1

Closed

ickk mentioned this issue Dec 3, 2023

Add triple license, CC0 or MIT or Apache2.0 bevyengine/bevy_github_ci_template#42

Merged

sere3925sere mentioned this issue Mar 10, 2024

Can you change license to MIT or Apache 2.0? Riey/erars#123

Closed

aylamz mentioned this issue Apr 18, 2024

Consider using a copyleft license Inspirateur/riverbed#10

Closed

ghost mentioned this issue Jun 24, 2024

Suggestion: Superset of the FSL getsentry/fsl.software#46

Closed

DJMcNab mentioned this issue Oct 16, 2024

Should we relicense Xilem and Masonry to the dual MIT/Apache License? linebender/xilem#673

Open

DJMcNab mentioned this issue Nov 1, 2024

Relicense Druid under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 linebender/druid#2414

Open

nook24 mentioned this issue Dec 3, 2024

[Question] Is the EPL-2.0 license compatible with GPLv3? kieler/elkjs#312

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Relicense Bevy under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 #2373

Relicense Bevy under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 #2373

cart commented Jun 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

zicklag commented Jun 22, 2021

YohDeadfall commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

ColdIce1605 commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

bonsairobo commented Jun 22, 2021

adam-bates commented Jun 22, 2021

frewsxcv commented Jun 22, 2021

OptimisticPeach commented Jun 22, 2021

wyhaya commented Jun 22, 2021

aevyrie commented Jun 22, 2021

robertwayne commented Jun 22, 2021

alice-i-cecile commented Jun 22, 2021

zgotsch commented Jun 22, 2021

will-hart commented Jun 22, 2021

Cupnfish commented Jun 22, 2021

gcoakes commented Jun 22, 2021

joshuajbouw commented Jun 22, 2021

Jerald commented Jun 22, 2021

CleanCut commented Jun 22, 2021

Waridley commented Jun 22, 2021

fintelia commented Jun 22, 2021

JohnDoneth commented Jun 22, 2021

jak6jak commented Jun 22, 2021

zmerp commented Apr 22, 2022

TheArchitect4855 commented Apr 22, 2022

nihohit commented Apr 25, 2022

The5-1 commented Apr 25, 2022

KirmesBude commented Jul 30, 2022

Relicense Bevy under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 #2373

Relicense Bevy under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 #2373

Comments

cart commented Jun 22, 2021 • edited Loading

What?

Why?

What will this look like?

Contributor checkoff

Contributors with "obsolete" changes (no need for approval)

Contributors with "trivial" changes that are ok to keep

Contributors with changes we reverted to unblock the relicense

zicklag commented Jun 22, 2021

YohDeadfall commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

ColdIce1605 commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

cart commented Jun 22, 2021

bonsairobo commented Jun 22, 2021

adam-bates commented Jun 22, 2021

frewsxcv commented Jun 22, 2021

OptimisticPeach commented Jun 22, 2021

wyhaya commented Jun 22, 2021

aevyrie commented Jun 22, 2021

robertwayne commented Jun 22, 2021

alice-i-cecile commented Jun 22, 2021

zgotsch commented Jun 22, 2021

will-hart commented Jun 22, 2021

Cupnfish commented Jun 22, 2021

gcoakes commented Jun 22, 2021

joshuajbouw commented Jun 22, 2021

Jerald commented Jun 22, 2021

CleanCut commented Jun 22, 2021

Waridley commented Jun 22, 2021

fintelia commented Jun 22, 2021

JohnDoneth commented Jun 22, 2021

jak6jak commented Jun 22, 2021

zmerp commented Apr 22, 2022

TheArchitect4855 commented Apr 22, 2022

nihohit commented Apr 25, 2022

The5-1 commented Apr 25, 2022

KirmesBude commented Jul 30, 2022

cart commented Jun 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading