During the Easter break I've built a fork of OIFM changing quite a bit of functionality. I've been meaning to make it open source too and publish the app on Play.
Since the work is now almost done, I've naturally been checking licencing stuff as I don't want to infringe in any way. From what I've read though an important issue has been raised.
Since OIFM uses a licence notice on each file, and I could not find any general notice applying to the whole project, the files that don't have the notice are in fact unlicensed and a more restrictive licence can be applied on them at any later time, therefore forcing any forks to shut down or rewrite half the codebase.
Please let me know if the Apache2 licence is supposed to govern the whole project and if so, whether I have the go to include a project wide notice on OIFM (Readme.md seems like the place for this) and remove any file specific notices, or at the very least let me include a notice on the files that don't have one.
I would then pull the upstream to get the licences on my fork and properly attribute copyright to OpenIntents.
P. S. Sorry for the double email, I used the wrong address on the previous one.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenIntents" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openintents...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to openi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openintents.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Great, thanks for the fast response!
Just to clarify: am I free to add the notice on any files missing it, directly on OIFM's main branch?
Great! Love it!
I don't know the difference of having a per file licence and project licence. Any insight?