I'd like to bring up an issue and ask if this is intentional or a mistake.
The "go-couchbase" repo says it's MIT licensed. However this looks quite misleading because at various places code from goutils is used. The license of that repo [1] is clearly a proprietary license and not anything alike a MIT license.
This essentially means every package including go-couchbase will inadvertently include non-free code. This came up in a discussion at Gentoo due to the Gitea package including that code [2]. I also reported this to Gitea [3].
Please either consider relicensing goutils or make at least clear that go-couchbase is not just "MIT-licensed", but also includes proprietary code.
[1] https://github.com/couchbase/goutils/blob/master/LICENSE.md
[2] gentoo/gentoo#12597
[3] go-gitea/gitea#8575
I'd like to bring up an issue and ask if this is intentional or a mistake.
The "go-couchbase" repo says it's MIT licensed. However this looks quite misleading because at various places code from goutils is used. The license of that repo [1] is clearly a proprietary license and not anything alike a MIT license.
This essentially means every package including go-couchbase will inadvertently include non-free code. This came up in a discussion at Gentoo due to the Gitea package including that code [2]. I also reported this to Gitea [3].
Please either consider relicensing goutils or make at least clear that go-couchbase is not just "MIT-licensed", but also includes proprietary code.
[1] https://github.com/couchbase/goutils/blob/master/LICENSE.md
[2] gentoo/gentoo#12597
[3] go-gitea/gitea#8575