bitcoin/bips
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/bitcoin/bips.git synced 2025-07-21 12:58:14 +00:00
Code Issues Releases Wiki Activity

bip3: Editorial changes in "BIP Licensing"

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Tim Ruffing 2025-07-09 09:37:58 +02:00
parent e1d72f0243
commit 0cc4d26e67
1 changed files with 13 additions and 13 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

26
bip-0003.md
View File

@ -397,17 +397,17 @@ For example, a preamble might include the following License header:
License: CC0-1.0 OR FSFAP License: CC0-1.0 OR FSFAP
In this case, the BIP text is made available under the terms of both Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal as well as the In this case, the BIP (including all auxiliary files) is made available under the terms of both Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal as well as the
FSF All Permissive License, and anyone may modify and redistribute the text provided they comply with the terms of FSF All Permissive License, and anyone may modify and redistribute it provided they comply with the terms of
*either* license. In other words, the license list is an "OR choice", not an "AND also" requirement. See the [SPDX *either* license, at their option. In other words, the license list is an "OR choice", not an "AND also" requirement. See the [SPDX
documentation](https://spdx.dev/ids/) and the [SPDX License List](https://spdx.org/licenses/) for further details. documentation](https://spdx.dev/ids/) and the [SPDX License List](https://spdx.org/licenses/) for further details.
It is also possible to license source code differently from the BIP text by including the optional License-Code header It is also possible to specify that source code is licensed differently by including the optional License-Code header
after the License header. Again, the licensing terms must be specified using an SPDX License Expression. after the License header. Again, the licensing terms must be specified using an SPDX License Expression.
Each source code file or source directory should specify the license under which it is made available as is common in Each auxiliary source code file or source directory should specify the license under which it is made available as is common in
software (e.g., with a [`SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>` comment](https://spdx.dev/ids/), software (e.g., with a [`SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>` comment](https://spdx.dev/ids/),
with a license header or a LICENSE/COPYING file). It is recommended to make any test vectors available a license header, or a LICENSE/COPYING file). It is recommended to make any test vectors available
under CC0-1.0 or FSFAP in addition to any other licenses to allow anyone to copy test vectors into their under CC0-1.0 or FSFAP in addition to any other licenses to allow anyone to copy test vectors into their
implementations without introducing license hindrances. Licenses listed in the License-Code header apply to all source directories, implementations without introducing license hindrances. Licenses listed in the License-Code header apply to all source directories,
source code files, and test vectors provided with the BIP except those where a LICENSE file in a directory source code files, and test vectors provided with the BIP except those where a LICENSE file in a directory
@ -418,20 +418,20 @@ For example, a preamble specifying the optional License-Code header might look l
License: CC0-1.0 License: CC0-1.0
License-Code: MIT License-Code: MIT
In this case, the code in the BIP is not available under CC0-1.0, but is only available under the terms of the MIT In this case, the source code in the BIP is not available under Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, but is only available under the MIT
License. License.
It is recommended that BIPs that include literal code be licensed under the same license terms as the project it It is recommended that source code included in a BIP (whether within the text or in auxiliary files) be licensed under the same license terms as the project it
modifies. For example, literal code intended for Bitcoin Core would ideally be licensed (or dual-licensed) under the MIT is proposed to modify, if any. For example, changes intended for Bitcoin Core would ideally be licensed (also) under the MIT
license terms. License.
In all cases, details of the licensing terms must be provided in the Copyright section of the BIP. In all cases, details of the licensing terms must be provided in the Copyright section of the BIP.
#### Acceptable Licenses[^licenses] #### Acceptable Licenses[^licenses]
Each new BIP must be made available under at least one acceptable license as listed below. BIPs are not required to be Each new BIP must be made available under at least one acceptable license as listed below. BIPs are not required to be
*exclusively* licensed under approved terms, and may also be licensed under unacceptable licenses *in addition to* at *exclusively* licensed under approved terms, and may also be licensed under other licenses *in addition to* at least one
least one acceptable license. acceptable license.
In other words, a new BIP must specify an SPDX License Expression that is either "L" or equivalent to "L OR E" for some In other words, a new BIP must specify an SPDX License Expression that is either "L" or equivalent to "L OR E" for some
acceptable license L from the following list and another SPDX License Expression E. acceptable license L from the following list and another SPDX License Expression E.
@ -448,7 +448,7 @@ acceptable license L from the following list and another SPDX License Expression
#### Not Acceptable Licenses #### Not Acceptable Licenses
All licenses not explicitly included in the above lists are not acceptable terms for a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal. All licenses not explicitly included in the above lists are not acceptable terms for a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal.
However, BIPs predating this proposal were allowed under other terms, and should use these identifiers: However, BIPs predating this proposal were accepted under other terms, and should use one the following identifiers.
* LicenseRef-PD: Placed into the public domain * LicenseRef-PD: Placed into the public domain
* OPUBL-1.0: [Open Publication License, version 1.0](http://opencontent.org/openpub/) * OPUBL-1.0: [Open Publication License, version 1.0](http://opencontent.org/openpub/)