twitter bootstrap seems to have the apache v2.0 license, so if I build a website using twitter bootstrap and then decide to deploy and distribute them (website files as well as bootstrap files) altogether, do I need to be somehow compatible with the license?
I'm also curious about the same thing with programming languages in general. It's not clear to me that the existing licenses are for the language or for the compiler if those are different at all (especially regarding new languages such as go). would be nice if someone can give me an insight on these issues..
Edit: hakre's answer seems to be appropriate for twitter bootstrap. see this for a similar question for go language.
do I need to be somehow compatible with the license?
Yes, otherwise you'll the rights to use. Check Apache 2.0 license text for the details.
The second part of your question is not clear to me. You might want to get a more general understanding of copyright law and software licensing.
This may be a little late, but . . .
AL2 requires you to distribute the license text with any parts of the original software (in this case Twitter Bootstrap) that you distribute, it requires you to place notices of changes made in any file from the original software that you change when you distribute them (the "bookkeeping clause"), and it requires you to keep any NOTICE files in the original software's sources with what you redistribute as well (a "project organization clause"). In addition to this, there are some license incompatibility issues. For instance, no GPL or LGPL version is compatible with AL2 except v3. That means, for instance, that GPLv2 is not compatible with AL2, but GPLv3 is. This is a common problem with copyleft licenses, and a problem in some cases for AL2 (but not as many cases as with copyleft licenses like the GPL variants).
