3 ms·
This is the most concise reason why not to use this code. The rest are complaining about the code quality rather than the implications of the licensing issues h
by ozfive 7y ago
This is the most concise reason why not to use this code. The rest are complaining about the code quality rather than the implications of the licensing issues here.
- m0zg 7y agoIt's quite OK to use, if you do a review, identify all problematic dependencies, and license them under more "commercially friendly" licenses, or replace them with something else. I do advise to be very careful about such things, and spend the effort to figure out the legal obligations that stem from transitive deps though. Not just for this project either, for _any_ project.
- ryukafalz 7y agoOr, you know, if you’re okay with the GPL. :) But agreed, you need to be aware of the license obligations of any code you use.
- m0zg 7y agoWhat I wanted to point out is that just because software X is licensed under MIT or BSD or Apache 2.0, doesn't mean that all of its dependencies are, and therefore, that it's _only_ licensed under those licenses. I have observed several times in the wild people not understanding or appreciating the meaning of this crucial difference. That's a recipe for much regret later on when you think you can keep your trade secrets, and you legally can't.