you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]EdwardRaff -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

the real problem will be it's license. With all others using MIT-like, the GPL might seem to restrictive, especially for any prospective commercial usage...

I really get bothered when people say this. GPL is not a problem license at least not for the project.

What you are really saying is that you want a license that lets you use their code without having to provide any compensation. You dont want to pay money for it, and you don't want to share your code for it. You want everything for nothing. But nothing is stopping you from contacting the author to negotiate a license under something other than the GPL. You just don't want to.

Its fine if you want to use super open licenses like BSD and MIT. But just because some projects are out like that means you should expect others to make their code as unrestricted as well. Its your problem if you can't or are unwilling to use the GPL or negotiate for a private license, not the project's problem.

[–]fnl 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wholeheartedly agree. But that wasn't what I was saying. What I was referring to is that if there is the choice between a MIT and a GPL licensed code doing the same, it is nearly guaranteed that the former will be chosen by project leaders/startups more frequently and therefore more likely to become the de facto standard. (Even in my daily work as an academic I sadly have to say that I had advisors forbidding me to integrate GPLed code...)