2 ms·
They're right - that isn't an open source license. Its a source-available license. And yeah, I guess we could pack it in and abandon the idea of opensource. Bu
by josephg 4y ago
They're right - that isn't an open source license. Its a source-available license.
And yeah, I guess we could pack it in and abandon the idea of opensource. But I think thats really sad. I love the fact that opensource code I've written is quietly powering things in companies large and small all over the world. Sure; it'd always be nice to be paid more for my work. But thats still really cool!
- 2h 4y ago> quietly powering things in companies large and small all over the world Thats cool that you feel that way, but I absolutely do not. I dont like the idea of huge companies making millions, while the authors of the software "powering" their business get nothing.
- josephg 4y agoJust to be really clear, if you feel that way I'm glad you're opting out of using opensource licenses. Not everyone wants to be an opensource developer. Not all code needs to be open source to have value. There's nothing wrong with that and that makes complete sense to me. If you ever publish anything to npm / cargo / etc, I hope you make the fact your code isn't opensource very clear. I don't want to accidentally use your code in my projects, in violation of your license.
- 2h 4y agoyou are welcome to use my code, as long is its non-commercial use. If you wish to have commercial use, I offer license for that as well for a fee.
- josephg 4y agoI understand that; but libraries I publish have dependencies. If one of my dependencies (your library) isn't licensed for commercial use, then my library also can't be used in commercial projects. Thats a decision I want to make intentionally, if at all.