Going from GPL to a weaker license was a terrible idea and whoever supported it should be held accountable.
Linux
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
GNU coreutils is not going anywhere or having its license be weakened.
But anyway, I am glad that you are brave enough to be willing to personally punish people for using a license that you do not prefer.
Rust Coreutils Continues Working Toward 100% GNU Compatibility, Proving Trolls Wrong
98 comments
Phoronix, you are the trolls.
We like the Rust, we hate the cuck license. Simple.
You're a rube if you think corporations can't throw some money at interns do a rewrite in MIT and bypass GPL that way.
So let them do that. Why should we be doing their dirty work for them?
Unless we're stupid.
Replace a perfectly usable GPL software for MIT? Nope. I used to fall for that ten years ago. The social infrastructure of software is more important than the exact tech used. The license is fundamental to that.
I wasn't aware that coreutils was going somewhere.
The availability of a replacement with a permissive license allows businesses to use it without giving anything back to the community.
What this leads to in the long run is open source projects starved for resources, and businesses pouring their dev time only into their own business-specific forks, without sharing their code upstream.
We've played this game with browser engines and we find ourselves in a world with no viable community-controlled browser.
Read a thread on rust forum about this and my impression is that most folks fall in two ideological categories. Either "No politic here" or some form of libertarianism. I understand where both come from as I've gone through some form of either, and I think both are transitional for many people. I used to roll my eyes hard at people making license arguments. We're past the point where tech corporations were playing nice with people. As they keep shitting on products and take more and more of people's work without returning anything, more and more people from those two camps would come to the realization that everything is political and the social infrastructure of open source - the infrastructure that gets more people to do labour for a project - is what creates and keeps open source alive over the long haul. The excitement that a new language or framewwok creates is fleeting. The GPL-MIT/BSD/Apache/etc divide isn't so much one of exact guarantees and legal rights, it is some of that, but more importantly it's a political statement of intent.
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.
Businesses can already create their own forks of GPL-licensed software and not contribute their changes to the upstream project
No they can't, at least not legally. Part of using GPL software is that you need to include the GPL with any changes you make.
It's the entire point of the license and the concept behind copyleft.
Reread that quote, and you will see that I was saying that just because they are required to distribute the source code with binaries--which they are only required to do if they distribute binaries--does not mean that they have to take any steps to contribute the changes they've made to the upstream project.
it still has a permissive license :(
You are very right. While non-copyleft licences makes sense for some software (a game engine like Godot, for example, released under the MIT licence) it's absolutely awful for the coreutils.

Lol, very first pair of comments. I love phoronix sometimes.
Ah, the duality of man...
If they could just use a real licence and even more copyleft (at least something, like EUPL, MPL or GPLv2)