Hacker News Reader

Comment by andybak | Hacker News Reader

> Do you enjoy your project getting forked, walled off and exploited for profit by someone who has never done you any good?

By far the biggest risk for most projects is "nobody notices it and nobody uses it".

And if someone "takes" your project and uses it - you've usually still got it. Software is funny like that.

View on HN

If the project is good, the license is hardly ever an obstacle for adoption.

At least I can't recall any such cases.

Do you have any examples?

If it's GPL-like its usage would be mostly confined to open source projects.

That's the whole point. If you build something on top of open source code, your code should be open source too.

Those of us who disagree are happy to see our software used in any context in exchange for attribution.

The problem that occurred in this case is someone at Microsoft taking the code without following the license at all.

Even if this is the case I might not want my library or application to be copyleft. Or even if I do - I might not want everyone else in perpetuity who uses my code to have to use a copyleft licence.

This goes back to the fact that not everyone can choose to use a GPL licence and in a world of compromise and collaboration, that can be a blocker.

Yes. GPL libraries especially.

My app project is Apache for historical reasons and can't be changed. https://github.com/icosa-foundation/open-brush/actions

(and I'm not sure if I would move to GPL if I could but that's a separate discussion)

I regularly come across interesting libraries that I can't use (half of CGAL for example)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com