[GH-ISSUE #499] License Consideration #268

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-27 15:49:38 +03:00 by kerem · 3 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-27 15:49:38 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @abdullah2993 on GitHub (Aug 3, 2016).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/quasar/Quasar/issues/499

Consider using a more Open License like MIT, Apache or BSD

Originally created by @abdullah2993 on GitHub (Aug 3, 2016). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/quasar/Quasar/issues/499 Consider using a more Open License like MIT, Apache or BSD

kerem

2026-02-27 15:49:38 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
question
label

kerem commented

2026-02-27 15:49:38 +03:00

Author

Owner

@MaxXor commented on GitHub (Aug 9, 2016):

Ehm, I'm not sure about this. But can you explain the benefits of changing the license? I like the part of the current license that everyone who publishes a modified version of Quasar has to provide the source code with it too.

@MaxXor commented on GitHub (Aug 9, 2016): Ehm, I'm not sure about this. But can you explain the benefits of changing the license? I like the part of the current license that everyone who publishes a modified version of Quasar has to provide the source code with it too.

kerem commented

2026-02-27 15:49:38 +03:00

Author

Owner

@abdullah2993 commented on GitHub (Aug 16, 2016):

Well GPLv3 was nice at early stages to build a community around quasar but now the community has built. Now its time for a more open license which allows users to modify it privately for their use cases. MIT is the way to go.

@abdullah2993 commented on GitHub (Aug 16, 2016): Well GPLv3 was nice at early stages to build a community around quasar but now the community has built. Now its time for a more open license which allows users to modify it privately for their use cases. MIT is the way to go.

kerem commented

2026-02-27 15:49:38 +03:00

Author

Owner

@yankejustin commented on GitHub (Aug 25, 2016):

If I am thinking of the correct license, you should be able to modify the code and such as long as you do not distribute it commercially (for money), right? If so, I think that the current license is sufficient...

@yankejustin commented on GitHub (Aug 25, 2016): If I am thinking of the correct license, you should be able to modify the code and such as long as you do not distribute it commercially (for money), right? If so, I think that the current license is sufficient...

kerem referenced this issue

2026-02-27 15:52:59 +03:00

[PR #268] [MERGED] Improved Client & Server #1067