top | item 36148265

(no title)

TAForObvReasons | 2 years ago

When projects vendor or copy from other projects, license bodies typically include all relevant copyright statements and licenses even if the license body is the same as the parent project.

NodeJS uses the MIT license [1] and reproduces the license for the MIT-licensed Acorn.

OP stripped the copyright statement and license attribution without mentioning hlky or the originating project in the license file. OP proceeded to confuse matters by assuming that "AGPL" suffices. It seems like the copyright statement was the offense here.

A simple email or github issue might have resolved the matter. Given the tenor of the relationship between the OP and hlky it should be no surprise that hlky opted for the "nuclear option"

[1] https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/main/LICENSE

discuss

order

No comments yet.