Corrected readme
#4
by stellaathena - opened
The readme claims this model is open source, but the attached license clearly contradicts the open source definition. I'm assuming that this is a mistake, though it's one that's important to correct promptly before people use the model in violation of the actual license.
Note that I'm assuming that the license is authoritative, but an alternative solution would be to change the license to an open source license such as Apache 2.0.
Also would be nice to set the license in metadata so it shows directly on the repo header (pet peeve of mine sorry) cc @osanseviero
zhenggq changed pull request status to merged
Also would be nice to set the license in metadata so it shows directly on the repo header (pet peeve of mine sorry) cc @osanseviero
Done!