3 ms·
1/ Mir is dependent on a proprietary Boost software license, and, should it follow Canonical's normal path, will require you to assign your work to them to cont
by rodgerd 14y ago
1/ Mir is dependent on a proprietary Boost software license, and, should it follow Canonical's normal path, will require you to assign your work to them to contribute. Properietary dependencies and a requirement to hand over your code to a commercial entity can be considered open source, in much the same way that, say, OpenSolaris was, with similar pitfalls. For something so foundational, that's not great.
2/ NIH is a bad reason for parallel projects.
3/ The major reason that nothing has unseated X, despite its very longstanding, well-known problems, is because nothing has had momentum until Wayland. Canonical seem determined to deep-six that momentum with a piece of software that will require other Linux environments to buy into a company-owned replacement. This seems likely to fragment the effort it a toxic way, with two incompatible replacements splitting not just graphics development efforts, but splitting app developers.
- compilercreator 14y agoDon't disagree with you overall, but I do have one nitpicl. There is nothing proprietary about the Boost license. Boost license is quite similar to MIT license.
- rodgerd 14y agoPerhaps I'm misreading what appears to be the Mir license block: GNU GPL v3, GNU LGPL v3, MIT / X / Expat Licence, Other/Open Source (Boost Software License - Version 1.0) Commercial subscription expires 2022-09-24
- mseebach 14y agoWhat is there to misread? Boost Software License is there? https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html : Boost Software License (#boost) This is a lax, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL.