Apparently it changed from 2-clause BSD: https://github.com/bigskysoftware/htmx/commit/e16f1865a494b6...
(The zero clause license drops the requirements for preserving the copyright notice when distributing)
(The zero clause license drops the requirements for preserving the copyright notice when distributing)
Here's an example where an MIT-licensed project switched to APGL recently without needing to contact contributors[0].
Interestingly, the MIT license explicitly names and allows sublicensing, but the 2-BSD and 0-BSD do not call it out explicitly.
tldrlegal[1] seems to think 0-BSD allows sublicensing, but doesn't mention it on the page for 2-BSD[2]. I'm not sure what to make of that.
[0]: https://github.com/immich-app/immich/discussions/7023#discus... [1]: https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/bsd-0-clause-license [2]: https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/bsd-2-clause-license-freeb...
The MIT → AGPL example isn't very illustrative. The requirements under AGPL are a strict superset of the requirements under MIT. Going MIT → 0-BSD is a bit trickier, because distribution under 0-BSD doesn't meet the requirements of MIT.