• 1 Post
  • 21 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 17th, 2023

help-circle





  • My mistake was in keeping it as a PR and working everything inside of it. (Instead of converting it to a draft, as I pointed out earlier)

    At first, I expected them to read the room (and my earlier comments) and that they’d wait until it’s finished. That’s all I wanted to do.

    There was a big misunderstanding here from refraction’s part and I expected an answer more inline like “If this is a WIP, then please convert this PR to a draft or make a new PR later.” instead of whatever this was.





  • I like it but it has a couple tiny issues:

    1. Font title is the same weight as the rest of the post, making it hard to make things out from afar.

    2. Scrolling for me often results in “reaching the end” when there’s more posts below, causing me to have to refresh often. (At least, this is the case on iOS and not on my desktop.)




  • That’s ok if you look at it that way. But at the end of the day, it’s just a tool like any other. Personally I find it really silly to put any moral questions into it because I don’t believe it’s worth my time to think about it, lose time on silly things and/or sacrifice the quality of my work. I’m not trying to imply anything about Linux, btw, it’s the same for the other ways around. It just feels stupid because it ends up like a political discussion, when it really shouldn’t be. You have the option to use basically anything and choosing to limit yourself over that is just plain stupid imo. You could make the arguments for how they process data, which is a whole other discussion, but then again, there are plenty of workarounds to all of those problems (which is exactly what some people are doing with virtualization, different machines entirely, OS tweaks, etc., which is fine, because they’re benefiting from it). Nothing against FOSS or otherwise, btw, I do agree about the need to support, but there are so many other ways to do it. Just using it isn’t enough, sadly. As the point of this OP is - it’s also market adoption, marketing itself, etc. None of this changes the fact that using certain tool(s) (e.g. gdb) is best done on a certain OS (e.g. a Linux distro) at a given time.



  • Because that (should) mean that the portion that pertains to the project itself is MIT.

    They can’t (and shouldn’t try to) relicense anything else they use.

    So if you make a piece of code that interfaces with a GPLv2 project, you’re obligated to abide by GPLv2 only for the things that are covered under it. This is what many products and companies do.

    I’m not sure if 2.1 in particular covers “tivoization” exactly, but that’s one big reason why v3 was made.

    MIT doesn’t prevent that, as it’s more liberal than GPLv2, but it shouldn’t stop it from being compatible either.