Comment by netr0ute
3 years ago
That's just the way you make more software open source. If you don't like making your software OSS, then you can take it or leave it.
3 years ago
That's just the way you make more software open source. If you don't like making your software OSS, then you can take it or leave it.
Exactly, a lot of us leave it.
I'm fine with my software being OSS, it doesn't have to infect yours.
Your license is fine as well, just oil and water is all.
What's the most widely used license type when it comes to OSS software?
MIT, according to this old github blog: https://github.blog/2015-03-09-open-source-license-usage-on-...
Might be because https://choosealicense.com/ recommends MIT license.
MIT and Apache 2.0, I think. They're both very permissive. You can both use the software as a library or create derivative works without needing to open your source or change your licensing. IANAL, though.
This is why I usually go for LGPL. Much more sane terms for infection.
I go the other way, AGPL.