Regarding a lack of LICENSE in the repository

[rockmanomega]

Hello!

So I am writing you here since I've been aware that a streamer by the name of Hypnoshark made a video on the PC port of Crash Team Racing, which I ended up compiling and building myself on Linux. I was quite excited to check out the repository and all but noticed that there's a lack of license over there so I asked and made an issue CTR-tools/ctr-native#4 and the maintainer told me that they depend on upstream (which is here) to have one, so that's why I am writing the issue here just to know how is the situation regarding that.

Meaning if there are any plans, how to approach it, etc. (perhaps with the same license as https://github.com/CTR-tools/CTR-tools/blob/master/LICENSE?)

Cheers!
rockmanomega.

[kkv0n]

honestly, does it affect anything if there is no license at all? i don't think so

[rockmanomega]

honestly, does it affect anything if there is no license at all? i don't think so

Well, it would be nice to at least have a notice or something on what you can or cannot do with the codebase, most decomps tend to have CC0 or MIT or perhaps a GPL to tell users what are your rights with it. Having an indicator of sorts also makes it easier for other people to share it more easily, see https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-repositorys-settings-and-features/customizing-your-repository/licensing-a-repository#choosing-the-right-license and https://choosealicense.com/ (and also this thread https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1720/what-can-i-assume-if-a-publicly-published-project-has-no-license)

[kkv0n]

i understand, well this decomp was mostly done for free use from the community side, you can fork it, edit it, do whatever you want with it, just make sure to give credits to the researchers and just avoid infricting ND/sony copyright on your projects to not attract unwanted attention, about selling a derived product from this it is more complicated to discuss and i can't tell you what is the posture there, but my hint would be to at least try your best to not make paywalled stuff, and there is already closed source projects that uses this research so that isn't an issue either at the moment

[rockmanomega]

I am extremely thankful for your answer as well as clarifying the position and the rights given here!

One more thing, I would like to ask if it would be all right then that either someone from the team or I submit a PR to add a LICENSE file at the top of the repo that expresses the intentions of the project's desires in a way that's easily visible? From what you're telling me, either MIT or Apache sound like great candidates for the project here given that: You can fork it, edit it, do whatever you want with it and requires attributions. That way, more people can find out about this without needing to head to this specific issue on Github :)

Personally I'd go with MIT but that's just me. Here are both of them so tell me if there's something I can do to help. (https://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ and https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/)

[FRDS]

Hey thank you for the inquiry!

We've decided to use GPL 3.0 License effective immediately for latest commit and after.

We will notify ctr-native's maintainer soon to let him decide on a license too! I hope this resolves your concerns!

[rockmanomega]

YES! I love that license! Long live software freedom :-)))))))

Feel free to close the issue. Just for completion's sake, it would be ideal if https://github.com/CTR-tools/CTR-in-C also gets the new license.