[Labs-l] Questions regarding the Labs Terms of use

Fri Mar 13 20:58:39 UTC 2015

On 13/03/15 21:23, Ryan Lane wrote:
> This alone is actually an excellent reason to require that code be
> publicly accessible, with a license associated before tools are allowed
> to be run.
>
> This was a pretty major problem in toolserver. When the migration
> occurred there were a number of tools that had no license and couldn't
> be moved because of that.
>
> I'd be in favor of pushing to make it a requirement for new tools.
>
> - Ryan

Toolserver required a default license for years, and you had to agree 
with that when renewing your account. So I'm quite sure there was a 
license applicable for all tools. The license could be propietary 
though, and that could impede the migration.