this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
140 points (94.9% liked)

Linux

53617 readers
1172 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I would understand if Canonical want a new cow to milk, but why are developers even agreeing to this? Are they out of their minds?? Do they actually want companies to steal their code? Or is this some reverse-uno move I don't see yet? I cannot fathom any FOSS project not using the AGPL anymore. It's like they're painting their faces with "here, take my stuff and don't contribute anything back, that's totally fine"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (22 children)

Maybe there could be another reason why people choose MIT to begin with:

When you start a new repo on github it makes suggestions which license to use, and I bet many people can't be arsed to think about it and just accept what they're offered. [My memory is a little patchy since I very rarely use github anymore, but I definitely remember something like this.] And maybe github tends to suggest MIT.

That said, please undestand that many, many git platforms exist and there is no reason at all to choose one of the two that actually have the word git in them.

[–] marauding_gibberish142@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 1 month ago (21 children)

I can't believe professional developers choose MIT because they can't be arsed to look at the license choices

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (11 children)

Ah, OK. No, of course not. I was thinking more about hobby developers.

But somebody else already pointed it out: MIT makes a project more attractive for investors. Follow the $£€

[–] Ferk@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I think many hobby developers also see "hobby" developing as part of their career, so they would happily try and have their hobby align with future employment possibilities. Since companies avoid GPL, those devs will rather choose a license that is more attractive to those potential employers when they see their portfolio.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)