Python

[–] lmr0x61@lemmy.ml 36 points 7 months ago

Damn… these were some of the OSS projects I was the most excited about. uv in particular is brilliant. Hope it breaks out again once OpenAI collapses.

[–] gid@piefed.blahaj.zone 41 points 7 months ago

Not a fan of this news. At all.

[–] hoppolito@mander.xyz 18 points 7 months ago

oh no

[–] a_good_hunter@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago (17 children)

The tools are open source. Someone needs to fork them before it's too late.

hideshow 17 child comments

[–] Vulwsztyn@programming.dev 5 points 7 months ago

the current versions will still be open source, you will always be able to fork them

parent

[–] Brummbaer@pawb.social 4 points 7 months ago (10 children)

Good luck - uv is under a MIT license, so every fork is just a free buffet for openai to incorporate into their enshittified version of uv. There is a reason the GPL exists and many people will learn this the hard way ...

hideshow 10 child comments

parent

[–] a_good_hunter@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Your truust in the Law is admirable. OpenAI does not care at all about laws. They do what they want and have an army of lawyers to fight anyone who says differently. Just look at copyright laws.

This is why I am saying do it now. Better safe than sorry.

But, since all l am getting is abuse.... I'm out! Y'all have the say you deserve.

parent

[–] Brummbaer@pawb.social 3 points 7 months ago

The world does not consist entirely of the US.

While I agree that openai can buy enough "law" in the US to do what it wants, the license is important in other jurisdictions and can be enforced.

parent

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

alll I see is abuse? I see only one comment under yours (and its pretty reasonalbe from brummbaer) but maybe all the rest are folks I have blocked.

parent

[–] a_good_hunter@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago

Not here....

parent

[–] Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 6 months ago (5 children)

uv is under an MIT license, so every fork is free to relicense themselves as GPL and prevent openai's gobblies.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] Brummbaer@pawb.social 1 point 6 months ago (4 children)

Do you have more on that?

I'm not sure you can relicense the MIT code under GPL if you are not the author or it doesn't say so in the MIT license, that relicensing is permitted.

parent

https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/

[–] Aatube@piefed.social 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

The MIT is what's called a permissive license.

Copyright

Permission is hereby granted , free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense , and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

That's the entirety of the text. You can do pretty much anything as long as you make sure the first line is still visible somewhere (and if you're not incorporating/relicensing it into GPL, you have to include the MIT license text as well; I'm less sure about how this parenthetical works but I do know an MIT project relicensed to GPL needs not include the MIT text), which in GPL it is.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#:~:text=Expat)-,This%20is%20a%20lax%2C%20permissive%20non%2Dcopyleft%20free%20software%20license%2C%20compatible%20with%20the%20GNU%20GPL.,-Some

parent

[–] Brummbaer@pawb.social 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

Thanks for the info.

So you can relicense MIT to GPL without the MiT parts staying MIT?

parent

[–] Aatube@piefed.social 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

yes, you're creating a derivative work that is entirely GPL. note that this doesn't stop anyone from consulting the original since FOSS licenses do not have revocation. if they use none of the GPL derivative work they can still only abide by MIT. however, your changes would only exist in the GPL work, and they must be used with GPL.

parent

[–] Brummbaer@pawb.social 1 point 6 months ago

Thanks for the clarification. I always thought that the GPL parts are also MIT then.

parent

[–] axum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 7 months ago (4 children)

Too late for what exactly? Describe in actual detail.

You said it yourself, it's open source so why are you running from it? The code is and will continue to be there in the open.

parent

[–] a_good_hunter@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (3 children)

OpenAI can change the license at any time. Who's going to stop them?

parent

[–] axum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It can also be forked at any time from the commit prior.

parent

[–] a_good_hunter@lemmy.world -4 points 7 months ago (1 child)

Nope, they can retroactively change it

parent

[–] axum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 7 months ago

Commit history literally exists, you can go back to the commit prior to changing the license and fork it. Do you understand git in the slightest?

parent

[–] loweffortname@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

This does suck, but there's time. I doubt the actual legal hand over has happened yet, and OpenAI is (likely, I don't actually know) an absolute mess, HR/structure-wise, internally. If the aquisitions I've been a part of in the past are any indication, there's a 1-2 year ramp before things really start to go to shit within Astral (assuming there isn't an immediate massive exodous of talent). Or I'm totally wrong!

[–] Narann@jlai.lu 4 points 7 months ago (1 child)

Is there any example of such move that does not ends with enshittyfication?

parent

[–] loweffortname@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 7 months ago

Off the top of my head, no. I'm just pointing out that there's time to respond before things get shitty. This isn't Redis rug-pulling their license. The community can be considered. Thoughtful.

parent

[–] harsh3466@lemmy.ml 14 points 7 months ago (7 children)

Well fuck. I was eyeing uv, but I guess um sticking with pip.

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] Midnitte@beehaw.org 4 points 7 months ago (1 child)

Could always fork it

parent

[–] harsh3466@lemmy.ml 6 points 7 months ago

I am nowhere near good enough to fork and maintain uv.

parent

[–] axum@lemmy.blahaj.zone -5 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Don't gaslight yourself. uv is open source and will not kill your grandmother. They just happon to be funded via Openai for now under their umbrella.

parent

[–] gid@piefed.blahaj.zone 9 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

It's not gaslighting yourself to be concerned when a company as morally bankrupt as OpenAI becomes the steward of these tools.

parent

[–] axum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

Yeah it is gaslighting yourself. I get Openai isn't great, but uv is open source.

Explain to me in great detail what exactly you think is going to happen here.

Also Bun, which was acquired by anthropic, is doing just fine as an open source project.

parent

[–] gid@piefed.blahaj.zone 7 points 7 months ago (1 child)

OpenAI could direct anyone working at Astral to insert whatever they want into uv, ruff or ty, without any regard to the needs or desires of the wider community. Or just drop working on it entirely.

Sure, these tools are open source and can be forked. But to do that successfully you'll need to replace everything that Astral currently provides these projects: expertise of core contributors, the time they have to actually work on it, and organisational skills to manage these projects.

This isn't something you can do overnight.

parent

[–] axum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

OpenAI could direct anyone working at Astral to insert whatever they want

This would be suicidal for the project if it ignores the community. the project would instantly risk forking and OpenAI losing the ability to influence the ecosystem direction.

to your second point on needing contributors and infrastructor after a fork, while this is true, uv specifically has seen MASSIVE adoption both for hobbyists AND corporate interests. it has greatly simplified the overall python packaging experience. I would not be shocked if other corps began supporting a community fork if the main project went off the rails.

Bun, another open source project, has been doing just fine under Anthropic nearly a year later. Until there is more concrete info on the direction this will take, the fear is MASSIVELY overblown. uv is quickly starting to hit critical mass adoption and may be too important for it to end up in a dumpster.

parent

[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

uv ---- fork ---> wx

(although zx is easier to type)

[–] foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 5 points 7 months ago (1 child)

but why would the vibe-coding future that Sam wants to shove up our arses need these tools?

[–] logging_strict@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago

Maybe it's more about access to Rust coders than the Astral existing toolchain.

parent

[–] beeng@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 7 months ago

Bit early for April fools :(

[+] NostraDavid@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

[deleted]

[–] moto@programming.dev 8 points 7 months ago

I'm not a huge fan of AI companies buying up all the tool chains and trying to insert themselves as the only middleman to coding.

Which feels like what these moves are.

parent

[–] just_an_average_joe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 7 months ago

Fuck shit asshole what thr fuck motherfucker why??????? I was starting to like uv :'(

[–] ALERT@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago

the day was OK before I read this. sooooqa.

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago

RIP

[–] logging_strict@programming.dev 1 point 7 months ago

Have zero exposure to Astral. If they were bought out by OpenAI tomorrow, would not notice the difference.

If i were a Rust coder, would have interest. Since i'm not, would be at the mercy of the maintainers.

Saw uv and ruff as a liability. Now? What is uv and ruff. Never heard of it.

Look forward to future discussions on requirement files again. Reintroduce everyone to the -r and -c options. How to put requirements into a hierarchy. How to deal with multiple venv. And how to manage requirement files across multiple packages.

9 comments in c/techtakes@awful.systems view that post

[–] mawhrin@awful.systems 12 points 7 months ago (1 child)

i highly recommend this excellent thread.

[–] o7___o7@awful.systems 3 points 7 months ago

Solid call to action

parent

[–] jaschop@awful.systems 15 points 7 months ago (4 children)

uv has a CLAUDE.md since January. Sooo, back to pip it is?

[–] scruiser@awful.systems 4 points 7 months ago (3 children)

There is poetry for package management. Apparently uv is substantially faster at solving package dependencies although poetry is more feature rich. (I've only used poetry, so I know it is adequate, but I have had times I've sat there for minutes or even tens of minutes while it worked through installing all the right versions of all the right libraries.)

parent

[–] froztbyte@awful.systems 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

yeah the dep resolution and instance management being snappy as hell are big reasons why people went for uv, but I suspect this will now get reevaluated (it should’ve been earlier)

pdm is what you want afaik btw, poetry is outclassed for a while now

parent

[–] froztbyte@awful.systems 3 points 7 months ago

(and that I even had to type that second bit is a big bit of my gripe with python in the last decade)

parent

[–] scruiser@awful.systems 1 point 7 months ago

Is switching to pdm as easy as installing it, then initializing pdm and remaking the pyproject.toml by adding all the dependencies with pdm? (If I'm understanding right, this basically seems like the same workflow as poetry?)

parent

[–] JFranek@awful.systems 5 points 7 months ago

If it's any consolation, Astral was apparently already funded by our favorite Silicon Valley crypto-fascist and egghead cosplayer, Marc Andressen.

From https://astral.sh/blog/openai

Second, to our investors, especially Casey Aylward from Accel, who led our Seed and Series A, and Jennifer Li from Andreessen Horowitz, who led our Series B. As a first-time, technical, solo founder, you showed far more belief in me than I ever showed in myself, and I will never forget that.

https://pixi.prefix.dev/latest/

[–] Ungraded@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago*

Hmm maybe give pixi a try. Though not all packages are on conda and I think for pypi it also just uses uv.