4 ms·
It is not more common because popular software don't use it and there is no need to. We don't need yet another FOSS license. There are plenty of them serving di
by distcs 3y ago
It is not more common because popular software don't use it and there is no need to. We don't need yet another FOSS license. There are plenty of them serving different kinds of needs. The license is developed by the author of the link in parent comment so it's no wonder that they are promoting their own license every chance they get.
- velcrovan 3y agoCan you identify a single other license that addresses all the shortcomings in the MIT license in a better way than the Blue Oak Model license? Saying “we don’t need another license” is like saying we don’t need more software, since there is already plenty of software “serving different kinds of needs.” We create new tools to address specific concerns in a better way. What’s the problem?