Timeline for What is the way to handle a project that is a mix of software and non-software items?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2021 at 18:23 | vote | accept | kim holder | ||
| Jan 10, 2019 at 19:39 | answer | added | kim holder | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 10, 2019 at 19:26 | comment | added | kim holder | @Brandin I don't know whether it works well or not - time will tell - but your point is well taken. I'll answer with what we've done. | |
| Jan 10, 2019 at 5:52 | comment | added | Brandin | If you have tried this (with a custom dual license text) and it works well for your project on GitHub, you could describe this procedure as an answer to this question to address the "GitHub friendliness" aspect of your question. Answering your own question is OK too as it may be helpful for others. | |
| Jan 9, 2019 at 16:39 | comment | added | kim holder | @Brandin This is true, but as long as the license file is called LICENSE.md, GitHub will add a View License tab to the repo's menu that loads that file. So, you can start with one of the templates they offer and modify it. | |
| Jan 8, 2019 at 12:23 | comment | added | Brandin | "[The linked answer] suggests that placing a dual license of MIT and CC-BY on everything is a good solution." - No, the answer does not say that. It says it is one option; another option is to license everything under MIT. Or to dual license it (i.e. give the users the choice "use everything under MIT", or "take the pictures (for example) and use them under CC-BY)" | |
| Jan 8, 2019 at 12:18 | comment | added | Brandin | GitHub's license "detection" mechanism does not support multiple licenses. See Licensing a repository. There is a specific list of licenses supported linked to from that page. | |
| Jan 7, 2019 at 22:47 | answer | added | Mark | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jan 7, 2019 at 20:01 | history | asked | kim holder | CC BY-SA 4.0 |