Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)B

bitcrafter

@ bitcrafter @programming.dev

Posts
3
Comments
546
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • It is not just that these complaints are noise, but that they contribute to a general environment of toxicity by complaining about other people working on a project they are passionate about, which is something I abhor. To the extent that I am coming across as being toxic myself (which is not an unreasonable viewpoint in many, but not all, cases), I consider that to be me holding up a mirror of the comment I am responding to.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • Fair enough, but in that case, them using a less optimal license is a problem that will solve itself because it won't be used, so it is not something that needs to be brought up by multiple people in every post on uutils.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • First GNU coreutils is going to remain GPL-licensed, so nothing that already exists is being given away; the only thing that is happening is that some people have decided to write brand new code. (And it is worth noting that GPL only says that if you share the binaries, you have to share the source code; if your changes are only used internally, you do not have to contribute them back, though you probably want to do so since it makes your life easier down the road when you want to use newer version of upstream.)

    Second, what scenario exactly is it that you are worried about? I want a specific and plausible answer, not just vague allusions.

    Finally, if the Rust authors are fine with the possibility that someone will use their code in this way, then who are we to tell them to stop their development when we can continue to use GNU coreutils?

    You did not answer my question, and I think it is an important one so I will repeat it: should they abandon the project if they are unwilling to use your preferred license?

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • Fair enough. I do actually get the concern, though I think that the threat is being exaggerated. However, I would argue that, if the goal is not to try and get these developers to abandon their efforts, then it does not make sense for every single discussion to get flooded with the same complaints about the license to the point that not much else seems to get talked about.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • Businesses can already create their own forks of GPL-licensed software and not contribute their changes to the upstream project; in fact, they do not even have to share their code with anyone at all if they use it internally do not distribute binaries. However, they are incentivized to share their changes, even if they do not have to, because if they do not then merging upstream changes will become increasingly difficult.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • It's not a loaded question; I genuinely want to know the answer to it.

    And regardless, it is not a sign of "ignorance", as was claimed.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • I agree that being concerned is reasonable. The reason for my fervor is that I find it unreasonable for every single discussion of uutils to be flooded with complaints about the license--that are often very toxic, e.g. reference to uutils using a "cuck license" as one commenter did above--to the point that there are few discussions of anything else.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • It is telling that you cannot tell the difference between having a difference of opinion and ignorance.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • I wasn't aware that coreutils was going somewhere.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • So are you saying that the developers should abandon the project if they do not use a license that you like?

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • Given that the Rust community seems to prefer more permissive licenses, I doubt that there many people who would be interested in contributing that be put off by this in practice.

    Unless you are telling me that you personally had been really motivated to contribute to this project yourself, but changed your mind when your leaned about the license?

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • So, in your opinion, should these developers simply stop their work on this project of they are not willing to use the GPL?

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • Whose opinion do you actually think is going to be changed? All I see here is a lot of preaching to the choir here. If I were a uutils developer, I would stay far away from all of these discussions because of how much hate is directed towards it.

    If they do not adopt the license you prefer, would it be better for them to just go ahead and abandon the whole effort? Are there efforts really so valueless simply because they chose the license that they did? Moreover, is dictating to volunteers what license they should be using for their code what you think this community should be about?

    You claim that it is important that people make tons noise in every single post on uutils because it will prevent a bad scenario down the line, but could you detail what that scenario is? Because people like to make allusions to such a scenario constantly but refuse to get specific and then engage on a discussion on the specifics.

    Incidentally, your choice of Redis is an example exactly illustrates my point that this license is not a gigantic deal it shows that the worst case scenario is... uutils being forked. Heck, it can even be forked at any time with a copyleft license precisely because its existing language is permissive.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • That tends to be true of a lot of projects before they are finished.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • You are the one saying that the project would be significantly better. I am asking you to translate that significant claim into a set of metrics.

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • So it needs to be commented on in every single article?

    If so, is that going to change anything?

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • So you are saying that the quality of the code and the functionality that it offers would be significantly improved?

    (It's not clear how much more adoption there would be, though a bit more is plausible.)

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • You mean, why am I participating in the discussion of project that I enjoy following?

  • Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong

    Jump

  • Okay, but if the developers of uutils do not care about these things, and they would be the ones most hurt because they would not get access to the changes that others are making... why should the rest of us make a big deal over it?