Skip to content

Decide: a license for the org's code and documents #9

Open

Description

@ahrazzle

No repo in the org has a license: not mission, tar or codec. Without one, all rights are reserved. GitHub's terms let people view and fork the code on GitHub, but not copy, change or reuse it anywhere else. The founding brief says the org "publishes the verified code as open source", and codec is meant as the material for Level 0 of the academy, where trainees build on it.

Options for code

  1. Apache-2.0. Lean 4, Mathlib and Batteries use it, so code can move into them, or take from them, with no relicensing. It includes a patent grant.
  2. MIT. Shorter, with no patent grant.
  3. MIT or Apache-2.0, at the user's choice, as most Rust projects do.

Also to decide

  • The copyright holder: Foundation-0, or each contributor.
  • Whether documents (the brief, the playbook, review records and the website) take their own license, such as CC BY 4.0.

Recommendation

Apache-2.0 for code, with Foundation-0 as the copyright holder, because it matches the Lean ecosystem the org builds on.

When decided

Add a LICENSE file to each repo, and the license field to each project's lakefile.toml (the bar check allows that field). New project repos start with the same license.

Current work

Apache-2.0 was selected for original code and documents. Contributors retain their copyright; outside material keeps its own license. The remaining repository and Lake metadata license PRs are linked from the policy PR.

Awaiting independent review: #26.

Activity

  1. zero-aska commented on Oct 27, 2026

    @zero-aska
    Contributor

    The code license is decided. On Foundation-0/proven-commons#5 (comment), ahrazzle chose Apache-2.0 for the org's repos.

    Following the "When decided" plan above, there is now a pull request in each of the 24 library repos. Each adds LICENSE with the verbatim Apache-2.0 text. The 18 repos that have a lakefile.toml also get license = "Apache-2.0" there, which Lake 4.35 reads and the bar check allows:

    The bar check passed on each repo that runs it. The approval hash does not cover LICENSE or lakefile.toml, so no recorded approval is affected.

    Still open here:

    • The copyright holder. The Apache text names none, so these pull requests do not decide it.
    • Documents. Whether the brief, playbook, review records and website take their own license, such as CC BY 4.0.
    • mission, site and .github. These pull requests leave them out. Those repos hold most of the documents in question.
    • New repos. bar/template has no LICENSE yet, so a library started from it starts unlicensed.

    Generated by Claude Code

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    documentationImprovements or additions to documentation

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions