apache license vs mit

be used to force external licensing without the MPL license. These, for reference to other people's source code for their own business software development behavior left a gap.The MPL License in section 7th allows licensee to mix the source code obtained by the MPL license with its own other types of code to obtain its own software program.In the case of softwar

Author: gnuhpcSource: http://www.cnblogs.com/gnuhpc/ From: http://www.sinoprise.com/read.php? Tid-662-page-e-fpage-1.html (unfortunately this link has not been opened), I basically did not change, just some typographical and finishing.References: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/There are many open-source protocols today, and there are currently 58 open-source protocols approved by the Open Source Initiative Organization (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical ). Common open-source

source organization Apache. The agreement is similar to BSD, encouraging code sharing and respecting the authorship of the original author, as well as allowing the code to be modified and republished (as open source or commercial software). Conditions that need to be met:* Need to give code to users a copy of Apache License* If you modify the code, you need to m

code (modified andSource codeDerived code) must contain the agreement, trademark, patent statement in the original code and other instructions required by the original author. If the published product contains a notice file, Apache licence must be included in the notice file. You can add your own license to notice, but it cannot be expressed as a change to Apache