Why do people insist on using such obviously garbage licenses?
I saw that discussion on reddit, totally agree with the licensing concerns. Ppl need to realize that permissive licenses make itstoo easy for companies to exploit your free labor by repackaging it, closing it off, and selling it.
It also seems like this is dead in the water tho, like most of these overly ambitious projects, it hasn’t had a real commit in 6 months.
I’m still watching redox with excitement tho.
What’s wrong specifically with the MIT and/or the Apache license? AFAIK they are still libre licenses.
Licenses that are too permissive let companies take advantage of you. They fork your code, throw tons of resources at it, and close it off.
Without forcing them to keep everything open source like the gpl does, its basically a giant free labor sign.
No Copyleft.
Apache has the advantage at least of Patent protection (I dont know how to call this to be exact) but for that, it is preferable a LGPL or MPL which are compatible with most, if not all, other licenses and still Copyleft (weak but Copyleft).
Honestly yeah, I really hate the aversion to copyleft licenses a lot of projects have. Puts a real damper on the spirit of open source if you ask me.
Yes! I see this aversion to copyleft all the time in community Open-Source projects for the Source Engine; why do people still use MIT for big projects?
Steal their work and rebrand it, just to teach them. Put a note on it about “use another license next time”. I’m serious.
