What License should we pick?

[vil1]

Goal

Discuss and decide what license(s) we should use across the organization.

Detailed question

Parserz and Schemaz currently use the Apache 2.0 license, should we make that the standard across the whole organization?

Is it relevant to choose another one (or no license at all) for the "internal" repositories (not meant to be a library) such as this one or https://github.com/spartanz/spartanz.github.io?

Expected outcome

A pull-request in this repository describing the decision.

[sergei-shabanau]

@vil1

standard across the whole organization

Is it an organization setting, or you just want the mention in this repo?
The last option is rather unrestrictive, not that we will be ignoring it on purpose 😉

[vil1]

I suppose it makes sense to have a single license for all projects under the organization. That way, we would have at most one endless debate about that subject :)

As an open question, I wonder if it would make sense to use another license for projects that are not meant to be published (as the present repository), but that's merely a detail.

In any case, I'm OK with using Apache 2.0 for everything, but I am not very knowledgeable when it comes to this kind of things.

[GrafBlutwurst]

IMO projects should be allowed to pick their own licence. E.g. if they use a GPL dependency that forces them into a certainl licence that is fine for me. Also things that are not strictly software like Books etc would require a bit different thinking in terms of licencing.

So maybe we should just offer a recommendation or a flowchart for projects so they can pick their licence more easily?

[sergei-shabanau]

I understood the licence in github is set per-project. I don't see how the same licence can be enforced for all projects in the org (also licence is defined in build.sbt file). I don't even see where the default licence is defined (may be I overlooked).

Having that said, I think we should just use functionality provided by github. I agree with having a recommendation, but overall I feel it's better to let it be up to the contributors of the project to define the licence.

Also, we probably cannot pick the commercial licence because organization uses open-source plan in github.