Expurple

8 ms·

31.
by Expurple 1y ago
If I understand correctly, Redis-the-permissive-project wasn't threatened by any proprietary fork. What happened is that the financials of its original authors were threatened by AWS hosting Redis as a service. It's not the same a
32.
by Expurple 1y ago
> I have yet to see any compelling examples. This thread has eventually changed my own stance on permissive licenses. Now I think that LGPL/MPL have the best survival characteristics: https://news.ycombinator.com/ite
33.
by Expurple 1y ago
Ok, I have thought more about the topic. You're right. LGPL/MPL have amazing survival characteristics. Probably better than those of permissive licenses. See my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4
34.
by Expurple 1y ago
Ok, I have thought more about the topic. I was too concerned with "theory" in the above comment. Disregard it. Web engines are a huge practical example in favor of MPL/LGPL. They suggest that MPL/LGPL may indeed have the
35.
by Expurple 1y ago
That's a good counterexample! If you don't need to maintain the code, then a proprietary fork has no maintenance cost and will be preferred. I guess, the atricle still stands where you need to maintain the code.
36.
by Expurple 1y ago
> the linux kernel is good evidence against it. To quote my other comment: > I wasn't there, but the narrative online seems to be that Linux won due to its strong momentum and the leading position that it established back in the
37.
by Expurple 1y ago
I wasn't there, but the narrative online seems to be that Linux won due to its strong momentum and the leading position that it established back in the 90s, while the BSDs were held back by the AT&T lawsuit. Due to this leading pos
38.
by Expurple 1y ago
A good example of this pull towards cheaper maintainance is Microsoft eventually replacing its proprietary web engine with Chromium. Although, as I've noted in the other comment, that wouldn't happen if Chromium was permissively l
39.
by Expurple 1y ago
As I think about it, the article has actually predicted the death of proprietary web engines used in Internet Explorer and MS Edge Legacy! According to Wikipedia, in 2015 IE was still bigger than Firefox and Safari (on desktops) [1]. I shou
40.
by Expurple 1y ago
No, I can't remember any dead proprietary forks that would support that idea. But somewhat, I can't remember any counterexamples either. I mean, a proprietary fork killing the permissive original. I can only remember: - AppGet vs
41.
by Expurple 1y ago
Perhaps you'll find MPL 2.0 less complex and more "in the spirit of the LGPL": https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/msjil9/opinions_on_th... https://www.reddit.com/r&#x2F
42.
by Expurple 1y ago
Disclaimer: I haven't been following any of these projects. Based on quick googling, they all follow a very similar pattern. The original is permissively licensed. After a decade of growth and popularity, it's relicensed as source
43.
by Expurple 1y ago
That's a different argument, unrelated to the one that I originally responded to: > > all of the big, successful open-source projects are either GPL, or can't be GPL because of the GPLs murky legality around linking I don&#x
44.
Dear Null(home.expurple.me)
2 points by Expurple 1y ago|0 comments
45.
by Expurple 1y ago
> You assume that corporations would not choose aggressive and hostile business models if they weren't forced to, which is obviously wrong. But, in my scenario specifically, they will be forced to by market forces (to some degree)
46.
by Expurple 1y ago
Unless it's a heavily-modified proprietary fork, the cloud providers are only "eating" your profits. Not the share of the project itself. Profit isn't the top priority for everyone. I just want to have quality free softw
47.
by Expurple 1y ago
Are you seriously trying to imply that Firefox and Chromium aren't big open-source projects? Define "big" then. "Literally only Linux"?
48.
by Expurple 1y ago
Yeah. Related: https://hypercritical.co/2013/04/12/code-hard-or-go-home
49.
by Expurple 1y ago
It's a worthy tradeoff if your goal is to have the best (free) software possible, rather than making as much money as possible
50.
by Expurple 1y ago
Your comment is pointless, unless you follow up and point out what specifically has changed in these 10 years and invalidated the argument made in the article. I don't take its conclusions uncritically. I examine them logically and I m
51.
by Expurple 1y ago
> What are the outcomes that we are talking about here? Living a life free of guilt and regrets. People make mistakes and can't foresee everything. That's normal. That shouldn't imply any guilt. I was talking specifically
52.
by Expurple 1y ago
This is true in the short-term. One of the points of the article is that, long-term , proprietary forks are prone to enshittification and/or abandonment, while the open fork just keeps chugging along, maturing, and changing maintainer
53.
by Expurple 1y ago
"Following my inner guiding principles without compromising" seems clear enough. I don't think that you have to fully verbalize and rationalize your principles in order to commit to a clear goal of following them. You clearly
54.
by Expurple 1y ago
Ideal for whom? It's still not ideal for downstream proprietary developers. The requirement to provide some means to relink the project is extra headache that can be avoided by using permissive dependencies, reinforcing the point of th
55.
by Expurple 1y ago
Most users and contributors put the functionality above copyleft. You are a minority. The article doesn't imply that you don't exist. It implies that copyleft projects such as yours will be largely pushed out of the mainstream. An
56.
by Expurple 1y ago
Do you consider open-sourcing the software a necessary precondition for making the world better? In other words, can a company make the world better by making proprietary software? In my opinion, that's obviously true. (Although I too
57.
by Expurple 1y ago
> all of the big, successful open-source projects are either GPL, or can't be GPL because of the GPLs murky legality around linking (the article mostly hinges on such a case - LLVM). Another comment trivially points out that this is
58.
by Expurple 1y ago
Indeed, MPL/LGPL are often a better tradeoff than GPL. But, in theory and according to the article, they should experience same effect. Just slower. When a (law-abiding) company finally has a strong reason to make some modification and
59.
by Expurple 1y ago
"Doing the right thing" (whatever that means for a person specifically) can be considered a goal too. Goals don't have to be selfish.
60.
by Expurple 1y ago
Software developed by enthusiasts that also receive patches from corporations (that can use the software thanks to a permissive licence) might be even better

More ›