misc: Added advice on how contribution licensing should be done and works
This commit is contained in:
parent
5525e05ea2
commit
47940ed1e0
|
@ -66,3 +66,16 @@ to dip into the commit descriptions as this improves the general Git experience
|
|||
Try to keep commits focused on a single small and atomic change to ease review, and aid the process if we end up having to `git bisect` through your changes, or `git revert` in the extreme case something seriously broke.
|
||||
|
||||
We use rebasing to merge pull requests, so please keep this in mind.
|
||||
|
||||
## Licensing
|
||||
|
||||
When making contributions to existing code, we ask that you update the copyright and authorship notice at
|
||||
the top with any authorship information you wish to provide. This is so you get proper attribution.
|
||||
The contribution must be made under the existing code's license terms as stated per file.
|
||||
|
||||
When making original contributions as new files to the project, this presents a choice on licensing.
|
||||
Historically the project uses GPLv3+, however contributions have been made using compatible licensing such
|
||||
as MIT and BSD-3-Clause. We would ask that you preferentially choose between GPLv3+ and BSD-3-Clause.
|
||||
|
||||
Keep in mind that the resulting binary is GPLv3+ licensed due to how the license is worded, but the individual
|
||||
contributions retain their source licensing when considering re-use in other projects.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue