I understand that if your boss tells you to write MIT/Proprietary code, you do so. I just wish that the ones who had a choice would use GPL
marauding_gibberish142
joined 6 days ago
I understand. I can't argue against wanting to earn money and be told to do something. I just wish that those that have a choice would take the extra minute to use GPL
Because most corporations do not contribute their changes back if it's MIT/BSD licensed
Look, I understand if your boss tells you to not write Open-source/only use MIT so they can profit off of it later on. But for the people who have a choice, why wouldn't they? I don't see how it hurts their bottom line.
I'm middle class and here I am raging on Lemmy about software licenses LMAO
I didn't think most of them allow port-forwarding
No idea. I personally use PVs and PVCs with k3s and it's trivial there with some downtime
There's a GUI for containerd?
In this case, yes. If you were altruistic toward the community, shareholders could instruct devs to use it anyway so it works out for both groups. Doesn't work the other way around
I'm interested in the VPN you use
Sorry, I'm not much of a software dev so bear with me:
If the libraries are GPL licensed, is there a problem? Unless you're editing the libraries themselves.
Now if the application is GPL licensed and you're adding functionality to use other libraries, please push upstream. It helps the community and the author will more likely than not be happy to receive it
Exactly
view more: next ›
The very act of writing FOSS code is altruistic. Indeed, I'm looking at the big corporations when I point and say "thief!".
Some companies do work that I like though. Mullvad is a prime example. Recently I've been looking at Nym and I like their ideas and work. I really liked that the big giants like Google and IBM collaborated for k8s. I believe Uber has done something wonderful for the FOSS community too but I don't remember what it is. The fact is that they can if they try