It’s sad to say but this is exactly what you should expect to happen if you license your work under MIT or equivalent.
And yes, this is exactly why every techbro out there will complain loudly in your GitHub/Lab issues if you don’t use MIT - they want to exploit your labour while they woo investors with a product that’s 99% a bunch of open source projects mixed together with some extra 1% proprietary sauce without contributing back in any capacity.
This is precisely why Linux is based. This is precisely why I prefer GNU-based systems over musl, or that attempt at re-implementing coreutils in Rust and with the MIT license.
...And on the note of the coreutils rust implementation, even this language the main guy is using is tedious here https://sylvestre.ledru.info/presentations/coreutils-fosdem-2023/#69 and here https://sylvestre.ledru.info/presentations/coreutils-fosdem-2023/#25
It is NOT about the license. Please don't talk to me about this. I am above this discussion, because I am "not interested" in the debate. Yeah, okay. Well you still ultimately had to make a choice and that choice has repercussions. This is the FOSS version of conservatives saying "it's just a joke"
I'm not really seeing how the MIT license has much of a bearing on his situation here.
GNU licensed code is also used and relied upon for commercial purposes, and people aren't any more likely to respect or donate to GNU-licensed projects than they are to donate to MIT-licensed ones.
And actually, if you're looking at it from the perspective of really wanting to fuck up a large number of companies, MIT license would be a great choice.
First you bait them into using your code by maintaining the project for years, then once everyone relies on you, you suddenly pull the plug and make them eat shit. :joker-troll:
That being said, he should absolutely pull the plug on core-js maintenance.
Anyone can use your code, including commercially. They can make modifications to it and not release the changes publicly. Just give attribution that you've used the code.
It’s sad to say but this is exactly what you should expect to happen if you license your work under MIT or equivalent.
And yes, this is exactly why every techbro out there will complain loudly in your GitHub/Lab issues if you don’t use MIT - they want to exploit your labour while they woo investors with a product that’s 99% a bunch of open source projects mixed together with some extra 1% proprietary sauce without contributing back in any capacity.
This is precisely why Linux is based. This is precisely why I prefer GNU-based systems over musl, or that attempt at re-implementing coreutils in Rust and with the MIT license.
...And on the note of the coreutils rust implementation, even this language the main guy is using is tedious here https://sylvestre.ledru.info/presentations/coreutils-fosdem-2023/#69 and here https://sylvestre.ledru.info/presentations/coreutils-fosdem-2023/#25
It is NOT about the license. Please don't talk to me about this. I am above this discussion, because I am "not interested" in the debate. Yeah, okay. Well you still ultimately had to make a choice and that choice has repercussions. This is the FOSS version of conservatives saying "it's just a joke"
I'm not really seeing how the MIT license has much of a bearing on his situation here.
GNU licensed code is also used and relied upon for commercial purposes, and people aren't any more likely to respect or donate to GNU-licensed projects than they are to donate to MIT-licensed ones.
And actually, if you're looking at it from the perspective of really wanting to fuck up a large number of companies, MIT license would be a great choice.
First you bait them into using your code by maintaining the project for years, then once everyone relies on you, you suddenly pull the plug and make them eat shit. :joker-troll:
That being said, he should absolutely pull the plug on core-js maintenance.
What’s the rundown on MIT licenses
Anyone can use your code, including commercially. They can make modifications to it and not release the changes publicly. Just give attribution that you've used the code.