Repository navigation
Ada's license #47894
Description
Ada had 2 license files - LICENSE-APACHE and LICENSE-MIT from the initial commit but when Ada was added to Node.js in #46410, only the MIT license of Ada was added to the Node.js' LICENSE file. Is this intentional or should we also add Ada's Apache license to the Node.js license?
Also, the license section on Ada's readme, which was added in ada-url/ada#328, says:
License
This code is made available under the Apache License 2.0 as well as the MIT license. For unicode processing, we rely on a few functions from UniLib which are licensed under the Mozilla Public License v.2.0.
Our tests include third-party code and data. The benchmarking code includes third-party code: it is provided for research purposes only and not part of the library.
So should we also include a copy of Mozilla Public License Version 2.0?
Activity
bnoordhuis commentedon May 6, 2023
If something is dual-licensed (or triple-licensed), you can pick the license you want - in our case MIT.
It couldn't be any other way because the MPL is a no-go for a MIT-licensed project like Node.js.
anonrig commentedon May 6, 2023
@bnoordhuis a small portion of ada/idna uses mozilla licensed code. should we focus on replacing it with a mit-based solution?
tniessen commentedon May 6, 2023
Does that code exist in this repository? Adding code to
deps/adathat is not covered bydeps/ada/LICENSE-MITis problematic (or, as Ben said, a no-go).lemire commentedon May 6, 2023
The ada README can be useful...
https://github.com/ada-url/ada#license
https://github.com/ada-url/ada/blob/4215aed05d6b98fbab7ab310f62d16ff90380924/src/ada_idna.cpp#L2734
It is not hard for us to eliminate the UniLib code, it was integrated to save time but could be rewritten from scratch easily.
RaisinTen commentedon May 7, 2023
Yes, it's present in
deps/ada:node/deps/ada/ada.cpp
Lines 2853 to 2863 in 6fb10ca
anonrig commentedon May 7, 2023
@lemire removed UniLib code from Ada. we'll soon release
v2.4.0. ada-url/idna#28