3 ms·

Open source for the PR, then switching to non-open licensing is a cowardly, bullshit move. https://github.com/cactus-compute/cactus/commit/b1b5650d11324aaa9a01

Open source for the PR, then switching to non-open licensing is a cowardly, bullshit move. https://github.com/cactus-compute/cactus/commit/b1b5650d11324aaa9a01814f98a42a02cbc7a631 https://github.com/cactus-compute/cactus/commit/b1b5650d1132... Use open source and stick with it, or don't touch it at all, and tell any VC shitheels saying otherwise to pound sand. If your business is so fragile or unoriginal that it can't survive being open source, then it will fail anyway. If you make it open source, embrace the ethos and build community, then your product or service will be stronger for it. If the big players clone your work, you get instant underdog credibility and notoriety.

HenryNdubuaku 1y ago
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Honestly, I’d be annoyed too and it might sound like an excuse, but our circumstance was quite unique, it was a difficult decision at that time being an open-source contributor myself. It’s still free for the community, just that corporations need a license. Should we make this clearer in the license?
- typpilol 1y ago
  Yes. Just say that in the license.
  - HenryNdubuaku 1y ago
    Done, thanks, let us know anything else.
    - typpilol 1y ago
      Nice job on taking feedback.
      - pzo 1y ago
        They updated but not to something they write here sugarcoating like they only try to limit corporations abuse. It’s not that paid license is for corporations only, it’s still non commercial for everyone including community.
ls-a 1y ago
Chatgpt could spit me the same optimizations they're doing in a few minutes. They're very generic optimizations that anyone who wants to work on mobile should do. Looks like they're planning to troll the competition with lawsuits using this license.