5 ms·

"If the software is open sourced, we can legally continue to redistribute the software even though author may not want us to." Right, you can legally redistrib

"If the software is open sourced, we can legally continue to redistribute the software even though author may not want us to." Right, you can legally redistribute the software, but can you ethically do so? Some people have complained about the bad precedent set for allowing left-pad to be reuploaded again after it was deleted, and the reason they complained is because the developer has lost control over the fate of his own package. These people can't complain too loudly, as the author in question did indicate that he was willing to give ownership of his npm packages over to someone else. But you could easily see a situation where a developer would want his stuff deleted and not be accessed, period. Why should this request be refused? The idea that the developer has lost all moral rights whatsoever to his/her work just because they attached a LICENSE text document feels wrong to me. Just because a license says you can 'do whatever you want' doesn't mean you should do whatever you want.

munro 11y ago
See my second to last paragraph for my response.
- tariqali34 11y ago
  And I think that's a pretty good compromise that I'll accept. I could also suggest a manual deletion process as well in case you accidentally released security credentials or something very private that really shouldn't be open source. (Manual in the sense that you have to send an email to tech support and wait for them to respond...)
  - mgkimsal 11y ago
    iirc packagist.org (for php libs) allows deletions for packages that have been downloaded < 100 times, which covers the situations where something was published accidentally and needed to be reverted.
mbrock 11y ago
The author explicitly chooses an open source license and publishes to a public repository for other people to depend on. That action releases the package into the public sphere. If the author then wants to undo this action, that simply will be difficult—more so the more people depend on the package. If several people depend on the package, then they will try to put it back again, unless they sympathize strongly with the author's intention to unpublish. That's just open source working as intended. There's no ethical framework that compels people to have that sympathy, in general.
mcphage 11y ago
> Right, you can legally redistribute the software, but can you ethically do so? Yes, you can. If you're sharing your code with the world, that entails certain responsibilities. You're telling people that they can depend on your code, and you should not be allowed to violate that. Open Source isn't just about getting attaboys for being such a cool dude—it's about working together to build a library of code. If you don't want to be part of that, if you don't want to take under consideration any of the people who will be using the code you're sharing—then don't do it. Just don't release your code. Find something else to do with your time.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

munro 11y ago

See my second to last paragraph for my response.

tariqali34 11y ago
And I think that's a pretty good compromise that I'll accept. I could also suggest a manual deletion process as well in case you accidentally released security credentials or something very private that really shouldn't be open source. (Manual in the sense that you have to send an email to tech support and wait for them to respond...)
- mgkimsal 11y ago
  iirc packagist.org (for php libs) allows deletions for packages that have been downloaded < 100 times, which covers the situations where something was published accidentally and needed to be reverted.

mbrock 11y ago

The author explicitly chooses an open source license and publishes to a public repository for other people to depend on. That action releases the package into the public sphere. If the author then wants to undo this action, that simply will be difficult—more so the more people depend on the package. If several people depend on the package, then they will try to put it back again, unless they sympathize strongly with the author's intention to unpublish. That's just open source working as intended. There's no ethical framework that compels people to have that sympathy, in general.

mcphage 11y ago

> Right, you can legally redistribute the software, but can you ethically do so? Yes, you can. If you're sharing your code with the world, that entails certain responsibilities. You're telling people that they can depend on your code, and you should not be allowed to violate that. Open Source isn't just about getting attaboys for being such a cool dude—it's about working together to build a library of code. If you don't want to be part of that, if you don't want to take under consideration any of the people who will be using the code you're sharing—then don't do it. Just don't release your code. Find something else to do with your time.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]