I ask this because I think of the recent switch of Ubuntu to the Rust recode of the GNU core utils, which use an MIT license. There are many Rust recodes of GPL software that re-license it as a pushover MIT or Apache licenses. I worry these relicensing efforts this will significantly harm the FOSS ecosystem. Is this reason to start worrying or is it not that bad?

IMO, if the FOSS world makes something public, with extensive liberties, then the only thing that should be asked in return is that people preserve these liberties, like the GPL successfully enforces. These pushover licenses preserve nothing.

  • ViktorShahter@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    I like non-copyleft licenses for one reason. Imagine if ffmpeg devs were like:

    so many security vulnerabilities, your free labor is bad

    thanks for pointing that out, it’s not longer free

    Most devs (including me) want to have some control over what they made. Permissive licenses allow rugpulling project if someone is using it while making YOU do stuff. ffmpeg is a great example. You may not like it but that’s how it is.