[webkit-dev] location in the tree for third party python code?

Chris Jerdonek cjerdonek at webkit.org
Mon Jan 25 21:15:51 PST 2010

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at apple.com> wrote:
> The MIT license is equivalent to the standard no-advertising-clause BSD
> license that we use in WebKit. It would be acceptable.

For future reference--

While we're on the topic, is the Apache 1.1 license also acceptable
for such purposes?  I recently came across a third-party module with
that license.


It also has no advertising clause and is similar to BSD (but possibly
not similar enough).


> On Jan 21, 2010, at 6:11 PM, David Levin wrote:
> I didn't see a web page about it, but when you submit a patch, every single
> bullet mentions only BSD or LGPL 2.1 is accepted.
> If you are sending in a patch to existing WebKit code, you agree by clicking
> below that your changes are licensed under the existing license terms of the
> file you are modifying (i.e., BSD license or GNU Lesser General Public
> License v.2.1, LGPL v. 2.1). Please also add your copyright (name and year)
> to the relevant files for changes that are more than 10 lines of code.
> If you are sending in a new file for inclusion in WebKit (no code copied
> from another source), the preferred license is BSD, but LGPL 2.1 is an
> option as well. Please include your copyright (name and year) and license
> preference (BSD or LGPL 2.1). By clicking below you agree that your file is
> licensed under either the BSD license or LGPL 2.1, as indicated in your
> file.
> If you aren't the author of the patch, you agree to include the original
> copyright notices and licensing terms with it, to the extent that they
> exist. If there wasn't a copyright notice or license, please make a note of
> it. Generally we can only take in patches that are BSD- or LGPL-licensed in
> order to maintain license compatibility within the project.

More information about the webkit-dev mailing list