Why does Rust promote the Apache2/MIT license instead of the Mozilla Public License?


if I'm correct, if Rust libraries were licensed under the MPL, modifications would have to be published, which would benefit the open source community.
Additionally, the MPL allows for static linking, so it would suit Rust's build system well.
Furthermore, the MPL is compatible with GPL v2 and LGPL 2.1.

Who made the decision to use Apache2/MIT? How was the decision made?

What were the key requirements for the license(s)?

Kind regards,

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.