Post 9vGa1JPBSmVtDDE5OS by interru@social.interru.io
(DIR) More posts by interru@social.interru.io
(DIR) Post #9vFP6IElwK30NrZKr2 by kline@cmpwn.com
2020-05-20T19:24:06Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
Watching another license debate and I don't think I've ever made my own position on the most reasonable setup:* For applications: copyleft licenses such as the (A)GPL.* For libraries: permissive, such as the MIT license.Why? For applications, it's important that your application doesn't get picked up wholesale, extended, and your original userbase extinguished, without reaping any of the benefits a commercial enterprise might stick on.For libraries, it's important to build a base of high quality software on which applications can be built. As more and more applications (proprietary or not) build on these quality, free software blocks, the fewer bugs we can hope to see, and the easier it will be to interoperate with other applications or build alternatives.
(DIR) Post #9vGa1JPBSmVtDDE5OS by interru@social.interru.io
2020-05-21T02:44:34.028502Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@kline I completely agree. It's kind of sad that most people only consider the ideological aspect of the debate while dismissing that there are also reasons a pragmatic approach might benefit open source/free software.
(DIR) Post #9vGa1JceehHxszWqOG by tyil@soc.fglt.nl
2020-05-21T09:01:10.771108Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interru @kline I use AGPL as my "default" license, it's what I use when I don't have a solid reason to pick any other particular license. This includes libraries. I've been considering to change to LGPL for libraries, to keep them open source, while also allowing people to use them in non-GPL codebases.Are there any particular reasons you went for MIT instead of LGPL for libraries?
(DIR) Post #9vGsRPhGUZ2VQgHNT6 by velartrill@pleroma.site
2020-05-21T12:17:51.414864Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tyil EUPL yo
(DIR) Post #9vGsRPvRdqNk8euhZQ by tyil@soc.fglt.nl
2020-05-21T12:27:36.378132Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@velartrill That's what we use at work!
(DIR) Post #9vGwRqlmEfqFD7qyTQ by mia@nazrin.moe
2020-05-21T12:52:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interru @kline consider the EUPL. it has been developed by the european commission and is suitable for both applications and libraries, as it is a copyleft license that covers server-side use cases but without the GPL’s viral aspect. it is compatible with many FOSS licenses, and written in simple but legally sound language. also has a guidelines/best practices document for non-lawyers.and it’s on google’s list of banned licenses, as they cannot exploit EUPL-licensed projects to run their proprietary services, much like AGPL.
(DIR) Post #9vGwRrbt6vWdokEahM by kline@cmpwn.com
2020-05-21T13:12:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mia @interru I think you missed the point. I don't want a copyleft library license
(DIR) Post #9vGwxMIF57FVxN3yim by mia@nazrin.moe
2020-05-21T13:18:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@kline @interru oh well, have fun supporting the corporate empires then
(DIR) Post #9vHJECjK5Y40DAASrA by kline@cmpwn.com
2020-05-21T17:25:48Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mia @interru did you even read my post?
(DIR) Post #9vHKPgskQMhKrjcK4u by mia@nazrin.moe
2020-05-21T17:41:01Z
3 likes, 0 repeats
@kline @interru i did. did you see how companies like google, microsoft, apple and others (the most hostile ones are ironically members of the linux foundation) have been undermining free software and used their “open source” policies to benefit from free labor of gullible techbros and further cement their position?nothing good has come out of helping companies build better walls.
(DIR) Post #9vHTur4nTGdP30BjDU by kline@cmpwn.com
2020-05-21T19:27:26Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@mia @interru I'm sorry your view of the tech world is so deeply poisoned by FAANG, primarily web services which are some of the worst parts of tech. It's true a lot needs to change, but I'm not sure at the expense of many other good projects.At my last company, my last project was to write out a bunch of metadata for the media we produced. The library we were presented with was a proprietary encoder for a proprietary format, which was dominant (but not overwhelming) in the market. Instead, we were about to source a permissively licensed alternative using an open format. A license like the GPL wouldn't have been acceptable due to our other licensing agreements, including many that could not be replaced with free software.In the end, this meant our users were able to really own their data, read it, process it, and use for themselves in any way they liked, in an industry where it's not the norm, but in my opinion, the single most important industry for it. It's a success story for free software, users, open formats, and permssive licensing.Did we contribute back? Some things yes, some things no. Many of the things we didn't, we couldn't. Generally the company gives back a fair chunk, from the linux kernel, to Qt, to smaller projects like this encoder.On "techbro". This is a gendered slur against my character because you don't like my position. I know it's against my position, because you don't know anything about me, including even what is on my bio, seemingly. This is all I want to say about it and I'd rather move on without talking about it further, if nothing else, because I know foss advocacy can do so much better.
(DIR) Post #9vHesQhZevLOAHN7gW by mia@nazrin.moe
2020-05-21T21:30:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@kline @interru this is not just about FAANG; i used those as examples because they are widely known to be as evil as they can get away with — and also apparent role models for silicon valley.i don’t see how your former employer’s cost saving strategy and decision to not be complete assholes to their customers is relevant to the free software ecosystem and the general public, though. interesting that you bring up Qt: had Qt been under a permissive license, the Qt company would have done the same thing google did with android by now, as is evident by their recent attempts at restricting access to the source code releases.i wasn’t using “techbro” as a deliberately gendered slur or even against you, specifically, but to talk about a group of people with an unhealthy technology fetish, who believe it can solve all problems while, by and large, not using it responsibly, driving so-called progress that just makes us all miserable.
(DIR) Post #9vHgFaXBMuJbH37NXE by kline@cmpwn.com
2020-05-21T21:45:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mia @interru >cost saving strategyit cost us more to be clear, and set us apart from industry norms.I agree though that we need less technology, of a higher standard, aimed at making our lives easier, not patching over real issues in (primarily) our social and economic lives when the right solution is to tackle them at the political source.
(DIR) Post #9vHgNYr7Ubn0NwFHCC by kline@cmpwn.com
2020-05-21T21:47:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mia @interru >cost saving strategyit cost us more to be clear, and set us apart from industry norms. We could only "not be complete assholes" due to the availability of permissive licenses. A GPL only landscape would have tied our hands and left customers in the cold.I agree though that we need less technology, of a higher standard, aimed at making our lives easier, not patching over real issues in (primarily) our social and economic lives when the right solution is to tackle them at the political source.
(DIR) Post #9vHgUSrcAYUlpPliO8 by interru@social.interru.io
2020-05-21T18:38:11.994422Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@mia @kline In my opinion that counter argument (which dismisses his view/arguments completely) is lacking in nuance. Name calling and classifying others ("techbro" - which basically just boils down to: someone I don't sympathize with) is also very inappropriate.I don't see the point in debating here if nobody is willing to question their own view.