[hitekker]

It’s perfectly reasonable for an Open Source software foundation to point out how a private company is misusing their software and misappropriating their brand.

Saying that Zig’s creators should sit down and be quiet sounds both condescending and craven.

[falcolas]

No, Zig's creators putting up a stink about a for-profit fork (a developer IP assignment clause, how.. actually quite common, come to think of it) sounds like they made a decision that they now regret, and so they'll use whatever tactics they can to pull people off the fork.

And lay off the personal attack, 'k?

[scythe]

>a developer IP assignment clause, how.. actually quite common

It is absolutely not normal to demand copyright for code written by a developer in off-hours. It is extremely not normal to write non-compete clauses for software developers and the ban on non-compete clauses in California has been cited as a key policy promoting the growth of the software industry. And it is obviously adversarial to fork a project and then try to get developers on the project to sign non-competes saying they will not work on the project.

[falcolas]

> It is absolutely not normal to demand copyright for code written by a developer in off-hours.

In the US, it's the standard. There are exceptions, but most companies will demand it. I've been bound by IP assignment contracts exactly like this for my entire career - from Oracle to a pair of startups.

> sign non-competes saying they will not work on the project.

Also, in the US, this is a long-established standard. You will not work for your competitors. Zig is a competitor for Zen.

[Nullabillity]

Right, because Oracle is the gold standard for ethical behaviour.

[sigzero]

They don't have a problem with the fork. They have a problem with the ethics of the Zen people and they pointed that out and rightfully so.