3 ms·
If I write some code and decide to upload it to NPM for others to use under a FOSS license, that's my decision. If I decide to stop hosting my code on NPM, that
by Andaith 5y ago
If I write some code and decide to upload it to NPM for others to use under a FOSS license, that's my decision.
If I decide to stop hosting my code on NPM, that's my decision too.
If an end user downloaded that code when it was hosted, and are now using it, good for them.
If an end user sets up their build pipeline in such a way that it re-downloads the code X number of times per hour/day/week, and I decide not to do FOSS work any more, and thus take it down, then that's the end users problem.
I think this is the difference between expectations and reality that's causing this to be such a big conversation.
The code(each version of it, even the busted one) was FOSS licensed, and you can do what you want with it no questions asked. But nobody is under any obligation to continue providing you with that code indefinitely just because you decided to depend on it always being available on other peoples servers.
- nybble41 5y ago> If I write some code and decide to upload it to NPM for others to use under a FOSS license, that's my decision. If I decide to stop hosting my code on NPM, that's my decision too. You are free to stop publishing new versions on NPM, but NPM is not obligated to stop distributing the package (as allowed by the FOSS license you previously granted) just because you decide you want to stop hosting your code there. Once you've published the code under a FOSS license you no longer have control over its distribution. Obviously NPM is also not obligated to continue hosting the package, but if they take it down at the author's request when they didn't need to and the result is broken infrastructure, they are rightly going to get most of the blame for that breakage. The author may have made the request but in the end it was NPM's decision to take it down.