BSD or MIT

[igor-raits]

Hello, Cargo.toml lists BSD OR MIT, however LICENSE file contains only info about BSD... Who is right?

[danielrh]

I believe the LICENSE file is correct. I will change the cargo.toml

[decathorpe]

This issue is still present in the latest published version, 2.3.2.

[alexanderkjall]

A follow up question regarding this. The context.rs file seems to be owned by google, and only licensed under MIT:

https://github.com/dropbox/rust-brotli-decompressor/blob/master/src/context.rs#L7

Is there some documentation somewhere that indicates that this file can be distributed under the BSD license?

[decathorpe]

This issue is still present in the latest published version, 2.3.4. The unclear license of this project is making it difficult to distribute any software that includes it. If parts of the source code are indeed covered by MIT license, then a copy of the MIT license text would need to be included in published crates in addition to the BSD-3-Clause license text.

---

Edit: Of course, if portions of the code are covered by BSD-3-Clause and other portions are MIT licensed, then the correct specifier in Cargo.toml would be BSD-3-Clause AND MIT, and not BSD-3-Clause/MIT.