Licence is MIT / Apache, of course.
EDIT: of course the relicensing is the problem here. Alas we’re in an all-time low interest in Free and Open Source politics, ideologies, and organization so the Big Evil Corpos continue to do their thing, one cog per time.
I feel like there’s a lot of concern about more and more free software moving over to the MIT license.
I honestly don’t know the ins and outs, but it’s probably relevant to people concerned about it.
That license allows you to take the source, make changes and keep them to yourself. Which is not in the spirit of open source imho.
Permissive licenses also allow corporations to build off of open source software without giving anything back to public. I don’t see why they’re entitled to profit off the free labor of a community they don’t contribute back to.
This was my understanding, but I really am not in the loop enough to say it with certainty, so appreciate the confirmation. I agree, I think we’re seeing from contributions made by people like Valve that there’s real value in requiring derivative work to give back to the community it drew from. But again, I’m really not super well informed. I just tend to pick GNU options when available.
We need more GNU projects