3 ms·
People can't simply take away MIT-licensed code either - it grants you the right to use that code, and does so irrevocably. What GPL does is make sure that cod
by Vinnl 5y ago
People can't simply take away MIT-licensed code either - it grants you the right to use that code, and does so irrevocably.
What GPL does is make sure that code that is built on top of that will also be accessible to you, if the product it's used in is made public. But your own contributions and anything MIT-licensed it is added to will never be legally taken away from you.
- kzrdude 5y agoWith software, we don't see any frozen particular version as the main asset, but the continuity of the project is the asset. Otherwise we wouldn't de-value unmainted software so much. (The code is there, the license is clear, it could be used). GPL makes sure the project's main strand of development stays accessible to you.
- Vinnl 5y agoWell, unless the copyright holder of that code decide to use another licence in the future — then the snapshot that was licensed as GPL will remain available to you, but the main strand of development may not. But yes, if this copyright is spread over many people (as it is in this case), then re-licensing is a herculean effort that is especially unlikely to succeed if it's designed to take away user rights, so in that sense a GPL'd project is more likely to remain open.