|
|
|
|
|
|
by seba_dos1
1568 days ago
|
|
|
It's not MIT equivalent. It it was, it could be relicensed. In many cases it's not even relevant what I would do or not, because such licenses make it not possible to integrate such code in a project under GPL, or to include it in a free distribution. Looking at these licenses closer, I wonder if Parity could actually be considered free. Seems to my eye like it could be, but IANAL. For practical purposes, I'd probably consider it same as non-free until it's said to be DFSG-compliant. Prosperity sure isn't free though. |
|
|