-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Scripts: Add BlueOak-1.0.0 license to GPL2 compatible #66139
Conversation
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message.
To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
Blueoak is not currently listed on https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html as being GPL compatible but I don't see any specific problems. Still might be good to get a lawyer to sign off on it. |
Size Change: 0 B Total Size: 1.77 MB ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
I checked with the Automattic legal team and the license should be compatible:
I also reached out to |
We can update now the command that runs when checking the license. From: Line 311 in f99eb38
To:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we can proceed based on the current knowledge. In practice, we were ignoring the same packages explicitly based on the same assumptions that BlueOak-1.0.0
is compatible.
This license appears on some npm packages. It intended to be highly permissive. The website states that it should be GPLv2 compatible: > Is the model license compatible with GPL? > The Council doesn’t see any reason why software licensed under the > Blue Oak Model License 1.0.0 can’t be used, combined, and distributed > with software under GPLv2, LGPLv2.1, GPLv3, LGPLv3, or AGPLv3. https://blueoakcouncil.org/license-faq
796a7e3
to
ff17328
Compare
Flaky tests detected in ff17328. 🔍 Workflow run URL: https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/actions/runs/11383365239
|
- Add BlueOak-1.0.0 to GPLv2 compatible licenses recognized by wp-scripts check-licenses. - Remove redundant ignores from Gutenberg's check-licenses script. This license appears on some npm packages. It's intended to be highly permissive. The website states that it should be GPLv2 compatible: > Is the model license compatible with GPL? > > The Council doesn’t see any reason why software licensed under the > Blue Oak Model License 1.0.0 can’t be used, combined, and distributed > with software under GPLv2, LGPLv2.1, GPLv3, LGPLv3, or AGPLv3. https://blueoakcouncil.org/license-faq --- Co-authored-by: sirreal <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: gziolo <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: aaronjorbin <[email protected]>
What?
Add BlueOak-1.0.0 to GPLv2 compatible licenses recognized by wp-scripts check-licenses.
This license appears on some npm packages. It intended to be highly
permissive. The website states that it should be GPLv2 compatible:
https://blueoakcouncil.org/license-faq
Why?
The license appears in Gutenberg's dependencies and seems to be compatible. Add it.
Testing Instructions
Run this on trunk and this branch:
Trunk shows errors errors with the license:
This branch does not.