Each license will have its own requirements, but most permissive licenses (such as the MIT and Apache licenses) don't require you to specifically mention them or their license to your application users. Instead they require that you maintain distribute the license and copyright information if you distribute the source code. In addition, the Apache license in particular requires that you provide a notice in any source file that has been modified stating such.
I have seen library licenses (see the second requirement), however, which specifically require attribution within a linking application.
I am not a lawyer, and you should consult with a lawyer if you have doubts concerning licensing.
Often frameworks have this kind of information on their website. If not, check the wording of the license itself and its website. Different licenses have different requirements. Copies of the GPL and LGPL, for example, should be distributed with the source code they cover.
As for providing your product under a proprietary license, again, it depends on the license. If you were to make use of a 3rd party library as a part of your product, and that library was covered by the GPL, your product must also be distributed under the GPL. However, if it was covered by the LGPL you would not have that restriction and you could license your product how you please.
Look here for jQuery: http://jquery.org/license/. I think you will want the MIT license (although I am not familiar with the details, I think it will suit you better than the GPL).
发布评论
评论（2）
每个许可证都有自己的要求，但大多数宽松的许可证（例如 MIT和 Apache 许可证）不需要您向应用程序用户特别提及它们或它们的许可证。相反，如果您分发源代码，他们要求您继续分发许可证和版权信息。此外，Apache 许可证特别要求您在任何已修改的源文件中提供通知，说明这一点。
我已经看到库许可证 （请参阅第二个要求），但是，它特别要求在链接应用程序中进行归属。
我不是律师，如果您对许可有疑问，应该咨询律师。
Each license will have its own requirements, but most permissive licenses (such as the MIT and Apache licenses) don't require you to specifically mention them or their license to your application users. Instead they require that you maintain distribute the license and copyright information if you distribute the source code. In addition, the Apache license in particular requires that you provide a notice in any source file that has been modified stating such.
I have seen library licenses (see the second requirement), however, which specifically require attribution within a linking application.
I am not a lawyer, and you should consult with a lawyer if you have doubts concerning licensing.
框架通常在其网站上提供此类信息。如果没有，请检查许可证本身及其网站的措辞。不同的许可证有不同的要求。例如，GPL 和 LGPL 的副本应与其所涵盖的源代码一起分发。
至于在专有许可证下提供您的产品，这同样取决于许可证。如果您要使用第三方库作为您产品的一部分，并且该库受 GPL 保护，那么您的产品也必须根据 GPL 分发。但是，如果 LGPL 涵盖了该产品，您就不会受到该限制，并且您可以按照自己的意愿许可您的产品。
在这里查找 jQuery：http://jquery.org/license/。我想你会想要 MIT 许可证（虽然我不熟悉细节，但我认为它比 GPL 更适合你）。
Often frameworks have this kind of information on their website. If not, check the wording of the license itself and its website. Different licenses have different requirements. Copies of the GPL and LGPL, for example, should be distributed with the source code they cover.
As for providing your product under a proprietary license, again, it depends on the license. If you were to make use of a 3rd party library as a part of your product, and that library was covered by the GPL, your product must also be distributed under the GPL. However, if it was covered by the LGPL you would not have that restriction and you could license your product how you please.
Look here for jQuery: http://jquery.org/license/. I think you will want the MIT license (although I am not familiar with the details, I think it will suit you better than the GPL).