4 ms·

what proprietary code? the guy on Twitter is seeing his own GPL code bring reproduced. nothing proprietary there. do you have the "don't reproduce code verba

• webstrand 4y ago
  He owns the copyright to the code, and the code is not in the public domain, therefore it is proprietary code.
  • yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
    That's not how anybody uses the word proprietary when dealing with software licensing. It's a term of art that stands in contrast to open source licenses.
    • ianbutler 4y ago
      For the record, I don't typically think in terms of the open source community. I grant that if most people are using it one way here I was likely wrong for the way it is typically used by the normal open source community, I followed up with a reply saying it would likely be more correct for me to have said "improperly licensed" to be included in the training set. Still it being private means it probably shouldn't be in the training set anyway regardless of license, because in the future, truly proprietary code could be included, or code without any license which reserves all right to the creator.
  • naikrovek 4y ago
    that is not what proprietary means and you know it.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
• ianbutler 4y ago
  Sorry it would likely be more correct to say "improperly licensed" code and not proprietary. Still for someone like me, the possibility of having LGPL, or any GPL licensed code generated in their project is a solid no thanks. I know others may think differently but those are toxic licenses to me. Not to mention this code wasn't public so it's kind of moot, having someone's private code be generated into my project is very bad. As to the option, I do not, I wasn't even aware of the option, but it's pretty silly to me that's not on by default, or even really an option. That should probably be enabled with no way to toggle it without editing the extension.
  • naikrovek 4y ago
    • ianbutler 4y ago
      You said, "don't reproduce code verbatim" as the option. Maybe you should use the actual name of the option if you want people to know what you're talking about. The "with public code blocked" option I am aware of, and is distinctly different from what you said. Don't be a dick, and if you want to be a dick, be right the first time or piss off.
      • naikrovek 4y ago
        well unlike you I am human. I say things differently at different times.
• IncRnd 4y ago
  The code is not GPL but is copyrighted in his name.
  • naikrovek 4y ago
    some of it is lgpl and some of it is gpl. code contributed by others is licensed differently.
    • IncRnd 4y ago
      The license for other code, even when in the same repo, doesn't apply to the license on the code that is under discussion here.
  • aeyes 4y ago
    It is also allowed to be used under LGPL terms: https://github.com/DrTimothyAldenDavis/SuiteSparse/blob/master/CSparse/Doc/License.txt https://github.com/DrTimothyAldenDavis/SuiteSparse/blob/mast... But that doesn't make it any better.
    • IncRnd 4y ago
      Yes, but I was pointing that out to my parent poster, who erronesouly said the code was GPL licensed.
  • naikrovek 4y ago
    GPL'd code has a copyright owner. those two things exist at the same time. try reading a licence now and again!
    • IncRnd 4y ago
      Slow down there with the snarky comments. I never said GPL'd code doesn't have a copyright owner.
      • twaw 4y ago