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.
So it needs to be commented on in every single article?
If so, is that going to change anything?
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.)
You mean, why am I participating in the discussion of project that I enjoy following?
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?
I really appreciate your insightful point as no one else has ever pointed this out before.
You're right, you can contribute as much noise as you can to any discussion you want.
But that is all you are doing.
Because it is not my decision as it is not my project, and I do not like to constantly be making big deal about other people's decisions unless there is a significant chance of them having a significantly negative impact on my life, which I do not see in this case.
I've been thinking about trying it, but it wasn't obviously "magical" to me when I last took a look. What makes you say that?
What specific problem are you afraid would make your life worse as a result of uutils being MIT-licensed that is so bad that the entire operating system is verbatim to you? Especially given that coreutils will continue to be available to you?
In your comment you said:
it’s absolutely awful for the coreutils
My (admittedly, facetiously made) point is that coreutils is already GPL, and it's not like it is going away.
Okay, so it sounds like in practice this would primarily affect the uutils developers by denying them access to these changes. However, they are the ones who deliberately chose this license, so why make a big deal of it in every single uutils thread?