Licence is MIT / Apache, of course.
EDIT: of course the relicensing is the problem here. Alas we're in an all-time low interest in Free and Open Source politics, ideologies, and organization so the Big Evil Corpos continue to do their thing, one cog per time.
17 Comments
molten_boron@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 41d
Okay, and?
helix@feddit.org · 10 pts · 40d
I also wondered why this is a big news. Usually those tools are tried and tested over years of development and only run once a day or boot or even less. Don't know if it has that much of an impact.
It's cool and all, kudos to the devs, but idk why it's posted here and an article is written about it.
huey_m@reddthat.com · 17 pts · 40d
InFerNo@lemmy.ml · 21 pts · 40d
That license allows you to take the source, make changes and keep them to yourself. Which is not in the spirit of open source imho.
verdare@piefed.blahaj.zone · 10 pts · 40d
Permissive licenses also allow corporations to build off of open source software without giving anything back to public. I don’t see why they’re entitled to profit off the free labor of a community they don’t contribute back to.
AppleMango@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 36d
While it does seem that way initially, strict copyleft licences can often do more harm than good. Projects need companies to use their software so that it becomes popular and get funding. There's a reason why there's barely any AGPL (or adjacent) licenced projects compared to GPL or MIT.
huey_m@reddthat.com · 5 pts · 40d
jcr@jlai.lu · 8 pts · 40d
We need more GNU projects
wewbull@feddit.uk · 8 pts · 40d
It's news because despite there already being a number of issues caused by Ubuntu transitioning to poorly done Rust ports common utils, they continue the practise.
verdare@piefed.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 40d
Haven’t those issues been found in pre-release software that’s months out from being pushed to the general public?
wewbull@feddit.uk · 3 pts · 40d
No, they're in Ubuntu 26.04 LTS.
LTS! The stablest of the stable releases.
7rokhym@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 40d
RReligion over substance.
tixooo@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 40d
atzanteol@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 40d
You think this is "big" news? An Ubuntu focused blog reporting on what Ubuntu is doing is not exactly the big time.
Cyber@feddit.uk · 6 pts · 40d
And I could remove it and reinstall another one if I wanted...
sudoer777@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 40d
The security focused Linux distros use Chrony
umbrella@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 40d
glad to have switched away. no more ubuntu shenanigans for me after years of linux 🥳
savvywolf@pawb.social · -5 pts · 40d
The latest version of NTP is 15 years old, and implementations are expected to be compliant. There is no risk of embrace/extend/extinguish from licensing here.
Open standards are better than copy-left licenses, IMO.
vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 11 pts · 40d
99.999% sure the idea here is exactly that. They want a GPL free system.
SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 40d
The money influences the standards and look at which licences the big pockets are pushing. Sometimes I can't stand the naivety.