3 ms·

I wouldn't be all that surprised to hear the real reason Rails chose MIT license was because that's what everyone else was doing. I remember there was a surge

by hk1337 1y ago

I wouldn't be all that surprised to hear the real reason Rails chose MIT license was because that's what everyone else was doing. I remember there was a surge of projects on Github, almost all of them MIT license.

hakunin 1y ago
Wasn't Rails the first major OSS to move to Github when Github first appeared? IIRC it's the other way around: everyone started using MIT because Rails did. Edit: Here's the initial commit in 2004, with MIT License already in there, way before Github launched in 2008 — https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/db045dbbf60b53dbe013ef25554fd013baf88134 https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/db045dbbf60b53dbe013ef...
- hk1337 1y ago
  Perhaps, yes. My main thought was there wasn't a lot of thought behind choosing the license back then.
- holman 1y ago
  Things were going quickly on the run-up to Rails moving over, but even so, Rails was pretty aggressive at jumping on GitHub when they did, and it was one of our first real "major" open source projects on the site, in hindsight. There was a huge difference pre-Rails and post-Rails.
- MangoToupe 1y ago
  Github itself was written with rails, yea? Seems almost like mutualistic dogfooding.