3 ms·
That require is a smoking gun for sure, but I'm not too sure about the copyright claim. It's their copyright on the API in the first place, and there are a limi
by Cushman 14y ago
That require is a smoking gun for sure, but I'm not too sure about the copyright claim. It's their copyright on the API in the first place, and there are a limited number of ways to wrap an API in Ruby.
It's sleazy to cut and paste code without attribution, but this post comes off as way too confrontational considering the company hasn't had a chance to respond yet. (Which response is perfectly likely to be "Ah shit, brain fart, sorry.")
- chaostheory 14y agoThis is really strange; I just don't understand why the company would do this. It doesn't make any sense, unless an employee in the company was too lazy to write his own stuff and wanted to pass off someone else's work as his.