5 ms·

Why?

• mikece 5y ago
  Just a guess, but lack of ability to embed it directly into other software without the technical requirement to then make that whole project GPL3. I suspect the OP would be happier with a BSD/MIT/Apache license.
  • netr0ute 5y ago
    That's just the way you make more software open source. If you don't like making your software OSS, then you can take it or leave it.
    • samatman 5y ago
      Exactly, a lot of us leave it. I'm fine with my software being OSS, it doesn't have to infect yours. Your license is fine as well, just oil and water is all.
      • prophesi 5y ago
        This is why I usually go for LGPL. Much more sane terms for infection.
        • stavros 5y ago
          I go the other way, AGPL.
      • edm0nd 5y ago
        What's the most widely used license type when it comes to OSS software?
        • prophesi 5y ago
          MIT and Apache 2.0, I think. They're both very permissive. You can both use the software as a library or create derivative works without needing to open your source or change your licensing. IANAL, though.
        • omoikane 5y ago
          MIT, according to this old github blog: https://github.blog/2015-03-09-open-source-license-usage-on-github-com/ https://github.blog/2015-03-09-open-source-license-usage-on-... Might be because https://choosealicense.com/ https://choosealicense.com/ recommends MIT license.
  • stavros 5y ago
    Is there an issue with the version? Would v2 be different there?