3 ms·
> Especially since sometimes copyleft forks are created because the developers made so many changes that it stands in its own right as a separate project (and t
by notaplumber 10y ago
> Especially since sometimes copyleft forks are created because the developers made so many changes that it stands in its own right as a separate project (and the developers feel that user freedom trumps upstreamability).
That "user freedom" you mention, which you had when you forked the original permissive codebase to GPLv3, is now lost on those new users you have wanting to make a similar change. It was certainly free enough for you then. It's a dick move ideological statement to push the notion of GPL "user freedom".
- cyphar 10y agoThe freedom to relicense software is not under the free software definition, so the users have lost no freedoms. The only people that have lost some freedom are distributors of software, which are not the group of people the GPL is trying to protect. This is all quite funny, because usually lax license advocates say "if you like the GPL then just relicense it because we give you that freedom" but then turn around and say "it's a dick move to relicense our code". If you didn't want people to relicense your code, don't use a license that permits it -- simple as that.