5 ms·
This is true of any litigation over open-source rights. What are you suggesting here? That we just give up on open source?
by lukev 5y ago
This is true of any litigation over open-source rights. What are you suggesting here? That we just give up on open source?
- trevyn 5y agoGiving up on expecting copyleft licenses to be enforceable seems reasonable. Open source wins by overwhelming closed-source advocates with quality code that moves too fast for them to keep up by maintaining their own private codebases or private forks, giving practical incentives to participate in the broader ecosystem.
- rvense 5y ago> Giving up on expecting copyleft licenses to be enforceable seems reasonable. No, it seems horrible. We need more free software, not less.
- spywaregorilla 5y agoSeems to me the parent is suggesting the same amount of open source code but less copyleft.
- rbanffy 5y agoLeftophobia is a terrible affliction. I wonder if the "left" in "Copyleft" is what turns so many people off...
- spywaregorilla 5y agonot a real thing
- fluidcruft 5y agoThere's no "we" here. If you don't like copyleft code, then don't use it and write your own. It's pretty simple.
- trevyn 5y agoFixed, thanks.
- lolinder 5y agoSo open source wins by writing code whose internal APIs change so rapidly that corporate forks maintained by full-time employees can't keep up, while somehow not confusing the heck out of the part-time open-source contributors. That... doesn't sound possible.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- tinus_hn 5y agoI’d suggest spending the time and money on something that actually achieves something that matters. Does it really matter that this project doesn’t offer to send you a paper copy of the source code you can download for free anyway?
- dgb23 5y agoAs I understand it, AGPL has further implications than your response implies, because it transitively applies to modifications and linking.