Remove SO attributions to sidestep licensing greyness#1149
Conversation
|
I guess the lesson here is to avoid using SO for anything. Don't visit their site and certainly don't link to them. |
Yeah basically.. I went down a rabbit hole of reading for this and saw they planned to swap everything to MIT back in 2016, but ended up backing out for some lame reason.. Thanks for merging! :) |
|
Yeah, I've used this same approach in some of my repos and will most likely have to strip out references to SO. I've only ever used basic examples like how to override PyYaml or quite literally this deprecation example. None of which are algorithms or things worthy of actual copyright, but just basic explanations of how to do something fairly basic.
Yeah, this is what they should have done as the current model is toxic. |
Closes #1148
StackOverflow code uses copyleft licenses (CC-BY-SA-3.0 or CC-BY-SA-4.0), requiring that any usage be both attributed, and the license bubbled up.
In this case, we've got two functions that are basically standard python patterns/snippets, however by including an attribution link (which would sensibly seem like the honest thing to do), and having these snippets copypasted, the rules are technically being broken. The law uses broad brush strokes, so common sense arguments don't really apply unless the matter is in front of a judge. ;/
This PR, as silly as it seems, allays any of this greyness.
e: lemme know if my import sorter kicking in here is breaking the repo rules/standards.
Thanks for your time!