91
"No right to relicense this project" - on changing the license of Mark Pilgrim's chardet from LGPL to MIT after a vibe-coded rewrite (github.com)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.ml
54 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

for those not familiar with Mark Pilgrim, he is/was a prolific author, blogger, and hacker who abruptly disappeared from the internet in 2011.

HN comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)

GCC? Without GPL we'd have more compilers – not just one monopolist. You're confusing protection with innovation death.

This one is so stupid, I had to think how to respond.

Why? What prevents anybody to implement a new Compiler, looking at LLVM ... ?

What we would have are closed source gcc forks, that is not freedom. This is the opposite.

I am old enough to remember buying a fucking Borland license

I work on gcc code, I know how ugly, historic in parts and confusing the Codebase can be. But I also know why. LLVM has no such legacy, and this is a good thing. I believe some day LLVM will replace gcc because of that. And LLVM uses Apache 2.0.

So, what exactly was your argument here?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago*

    So, what exactly was your argument here?

    Duno, you tried to convince me that the xGPL restrictions are only for my benefit. I strongly disagree with that opinion, that's all. And I do not really care about argument, if something is used more often, then it's best suited for me. I avoid to contribute to GPL projects and prefer some with MIT or BSD licenses.

    I am old enough to remember buying a fucking Borland license

    I hope you are old enough to agree with me that TurboVision was fucking awesome.

    I work on gcc code

    All the hate on you. No, no, joking, I appreciate your work. gcc is a mess, I know.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent