3 ms·

> Who is MIT a turnoff for? For me. I want my software to be as much gplv3 as possible. Not trolling. Also not arguing, it's just the way I roll.

• gtsop 5y ago
  I would honestly like to understand why the downvotes. I am giving a blatantly honest answer of a case of people like me who would be turned off by a licence. I don't expect anyone to necesserily agree but I don't get why my opinion is being downvoted. Is it insulting or irrelevant to the issue or what?
  • johnisgood 5y ago
    I think it is a valid answer to a question that has been posed. I think the reason for the down-votes is that you did not elaborate on as to why MIT is a turnoff for you, and/or why you would rather prefer GPLv3 over MIT. ...or perhaps they did not like the last part of your comment, the "it's just the way I roll" one.
    • gtsop 5y ago
      Maybe you're right. I thought it is understood why pro-gplv3 people like the licence. Just to elaborate then, I personally want my software to use gplv3 because I side with the ideological/ethical aspects of free software. I want to support projects/teams/orgs that build this future. An mit licence would allow a company to capitalise on the community's effort withought giving nothing back. Or even worse, make modifications and deliver closed source blobs to users. I personally do not like that. Thus, I wouldn't support/use this library. To be clear, I am not running 100% gpl software atm, but I see it as a journey going there, slowly transitioning.