# \[ANN\] About.jl

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-about-jl/118547>\
**Category:** Package Announcements\
**Tags:** package, announcement\
**Created:** [August 24, 2024, 3:03am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-about-jl/118547 "2024-08-24T03:03:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 7

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![visr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/visr/32/17204_2.png) [@visr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/visr)\
**Post date:** [August 26, 2024, 8:55pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-about-jl/118547/7 "2024-08-26T20:55:45Z")

</div>

I agree it looks fantastic. Though I think About.jl’s MPL-2.0 license would make it difficult to be adopted like that. Don’t want to derail this thread though, this was discussed recently in a different thread, specifically this post addresses adoption:

> [@Package licenses: Contemplations and considerations](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/package-licenses-contemplations-and-considerations/117922/14):
>
> I’ve probably thought more about open source licensing than most people. You can certainly try non-MIT licenses if you want, but there is dangers to engaging in license innovations. Everybody knows what the industry consensus is on how MIT works (which may or may not match what the licenses says exactly, but there is some legal relevance to the common understanding also) and that makes it easy for people to use, contribute to, etc. The key thing I would say is that you have to be clear in your m…

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-about-jl/118547)._