-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31
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
Licensing model for uwot and umappp #93
Comments
I can't speak for umappp but in terms of uwot:
|
FWIW I was going to go for MIT for umappp before this discussion. Dunno if that's appropriate here, all my licensing lectures went in one ear and straight out the other. Guess I could use BSD-2 instead. FYI umappp itself links to Annoy and Hnswlib (via knncolle), so if we're considering linked libraries as being part of the "distribution", you'd have to check their licenses as well. Both are Apache 2.0, which seems... fine? |
Thanks @jlmelville for the clear and detailed explanation. All makes perfect sense. And @LTLA , yes, I know that licensing models is as dull as it gets :-) From what little I know there is very little difference between MIT, BSD, and Apache. Those are all permissive licenses that allow re-use and integration into other software with almost no restrictions except acknowledging the copyright of the originator and that you cannot hold the originator liable. So whichever of those licenses you end up using, all great for my use; thanks! |
uwot and by being a descendant @LTLA's umappp are currently licensed under GPL-3 while the original Python UMAP was licensed under BSD 3-clause. Are there any thoughts on licensing uwot/umappp under the permissive licensing model so these great packages can be used in non-open source projects? Thanks for considering.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: