|
|
|
|
|
|
by intertextuality
2619 days ago
|
|
|
I'm not OP, I'm GP. Second, I fully understand git, github, gitlab, etc. I'm specifically discussing a situation wherein someone has uploaded non-licensed code to github. I am not advocating for this. I am discussing what should be the default behavior for a repo if unlicensed. Another alternative is not having the repo be usable at all (so not private) if one attempts to bring it public without a license. |
|
|
And you are continuing to misunderstand how this works. If you can view it, you can copy it. Nothing prevents someone from viewing a public repo. So nothing prevents someone from copying it. Therefore any attempt to make it difficult is just a PITA.
That's why Github has a default license for all non-licensed public repos. Because it's a public repo. If it wasn't supposed to be available to copy, the source code shouldn't have been made a public repository.
So again. If what you're looking for is a private repo solution, Gitlab offers this enterprise-level solution for free. You are barking up the wrong tree.