🇳🇱
@masterofthetiger@theres.life
GPL is a hostage negotiation, or at best barter. I'll give you my code if you give me yours. There is nothing "free" about it in my mind.
MIT/BSD/Apache is true freedom "You can have my code, no strings attached, do what you want with it, just promise you will tell people it is open-source and who wrote it!"
Ouch! "Hostage"
That seems overly harsh.
"My" code under GPL is a social benefit contract. You are no hostage. You are free to walk away. You are free to write your own new code...yes, it will need to be from scratch, but if your goal is to make money, you should be prepared to pay the freight.
"My" code is not "yours" to bury under the weight of your proprietary expectations (benefit), added to keep everyone from benefiting from improved software.
@Algot
It has nothing to do with money or proprietary code. The **vast** majority of people hurt by the GPL are the open source developers themselves. Countless and endless man hours invested rewriting GPL code from scratch to do the exact same thing just so it can be used in a library with the rest of the open-source community.
The people who want to write proprietary code are largely unaffected. Afterall you only have to release the code if you distribute an executable, so easily circumvented usually, But those who are donating free code and contributing to the community constantly feel "held hostage" by the GPL. Thus why there has been such a massive effort in recent years to dump it.
@masterofthetiger@theres.life
A "massive effort to dump it" seems counterproductive.
Just write the software you have not been "given" so you can, indeed give it away, yourself.
Have at it...corporations won't mind at all.
Sadly, most users won't notice the impact, grudgingly paying for the proprietary software which relies on those "open" libraries.
