Re-license visual editor and VS Code extension as MIT

[hadley]

Just chatted about this with JJ, and there's no reason to license it differently to the rest of quarto.

[mcanouil]

For reference:

• AGPL prohibits VS Code extension usage at many companies #430

Cc @juliasilge

[cderv]

I move to quarto repo where the VSCode Extension and the Visual Editor code live.

@hadley by VS Code editor are you referring to one of them or both ?

For context, following #727 , we made indeed more explicit that this is AGPL-3.0 for now (https://github.com/quarto-dev/quarto#licenses) also mentioned in website https://quarto.org/license.html#vs-code-extension-and-visual-editor

it would be good to make MIT what we can.

[hadley]

We can relicense them both as MIT.

[juliasilge]

We'll need to get permission to re-license from the non-Posit-employee contributors to those components.

[juliasilge]

We are systematically re-licensing Quarto editor components to use the MIT license, to make our licenses as clear and permissive as possible. To do so, we need the approval of all copyright holders, which I have found by reviewing contributions from all all non-Posit contributors.

@candemircan, @daniel-eder, @DevenVGokhale, @devmcp, @fflores97, @floswald, @jkrumbiegel, @jooyoungseo, @kylebutts, @kv9898, @medhatessmat, @momr, @samrickman, @Wuvist, would you permit us to re-license the Quarto VS Code extension and related components in this repo with the MIT license? If so, please comment "I agree" below.

• @candemircan
• @daniel-eder
• @DevenVGokhale
• @devmcp
• @fflores97
• @floswald
• @jkrumbiegel
• @jooyoungseo
• @kylebutts
• @kv9898
• @medhatessmat
• @momr
• @samrickman
• @Wuvist
• @mcanouil

[samrickman]

I agree. And thanks for tracking me down - I’d completely forgotten about this contribution!

[mcanouil]

I'm technically not Posit employee either and contributed as external/myself, so to avoid issues:

I agree and approve relicensing to MIT.

[devmcp]

I agree!

[Wuvist]

I agree

[kv9898]

I agree

[jkrumbiegel]

I agree