Would you consider adding a license?

[pschyska]

I'd like to use some of your work, so I hoped you would consider licensing it under a FOSS license.

Thanks

[fholzer]

Hi,

after a quick search i found this to be a more complicated request than expected. See https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/7013/license-for-docker-images

I'd like to use a permissive license which also requires publication of modifications, but this ir originally based on someone else's work, which in turn is based on the official nginx Dockerfile - though i suppose not much is left over from those...

[pschyska]

IANAL, but I think:

1.) There is enough from the base Dockerfile remaining that you need to choose a compatible license to Apache 2.0. I don't know how the intermediate step ("someone else's work") looks though. I think they are compelled to license as Apache 2.0 anyways
2.) The license only covers the Dockerfile, not nginx or the base distro (alpine, e.g.).

I also learned that by publishing to docker hub you grant an unspecified implicit permissive license Terms, Section 6.4 from the linked stack exchange thread.

So my feeling is it's fine for anyone to FROM ... this image, it's probably technically not legal for me to clone this repo and make modification and publish them though.

I think you could choose Apache 2.0 without issues, but if you don't want to deal with this, I understand :-). I can just make a layer ontop of this and pull from dockerhub. Feel free to just close this.

Thanks for your work!.