Install Guix

  • 7 Posts
  • 85 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 17th, 2026

help-circle








  • Spent some time reading this: https://rosenlaw.com/OSL3.0-explained.htm

    Section IV. Source Code And Derivative Works seems interesting.

    … authorizes licensees “to translate, adapt, alter, transform, modify, or arrange the Original Work, thereby creating derivative works (” Derivative Works “) based upon the Original Work.” …

    Only the Source Code of the Original Work or the Source Code of a modified (altered, etc.) Derivative Work must be disclosed.

    If linking (by whatever technical means) can be accomplished by making and using unmodified copies of the Original Work, then 1(a) and 1© permit that; only the Source Code of the Original Work must be disclosed.

    I’m totally not qualified to comment on this, but it kiiiinda seems like OSL 3.0 would capture the work2.go file. At least, it doesn’t seem to give up on work2.go as easily as the MPL 2.0…

    Maybe a better middle ground between GPL and MIT? It seems like: if you purely use my library, then you don’t disclose anything. But if you touch my library, then you have to disclose the (entire) change?


  • Seems kinda pointless, no?.. I mean, I get MPL is a weak copyleft license… but sheesh, that weak? If the consumers get to hide 99% of their code, why not just pick MIT? Having the consumers publish a 1 line change seems pretty worthless.

    I understand if I want stronger protections, I could move to a GPL license, but is there no middle ground? MPL doesn’t really seem like middle… it seems like just 1 step away from MIT.

    LGPL seems interesting, but it doesn’t really seem compatible with languages like Go, where everything is compiled statically.

    I guess I’m missing the context the MPL was created for.