[rk06]

> Right down to that time when the community cried out about Facebook's odd license clause regarding patents. And they changed it.

Looks like you are remembering things differently. Facebook doubled down on public outcry and even react maintainers gave up on it.

Then wordpress chose to stop its adoption of react in its new editor. And that caused Facebook to change the licence.

The fact a big org was needed for this change, is a major factor for Facebook's distrust.

[wayneftw]

The WordPress group isn't part of the community? That it's a big org is a distinction you're making, not me. Open source communities are full of big organizations.

And now that the genie is out of the bottle anyone can do as they please with this fairly small rendering library and Facebook can't stop them. So I'm still not sure what the concern about Facebook is?

[rk06]

The problem was that:

1. They chose to insert the clause and refused to use standard MIT license despite complaints from community and their own developers

2. They are the kind of company who chose to do shady stuff despite complaints from community and their own developers

#1 was fixed. #2 is still the case and may come to bite back in future. That is the concern

[wayneftw]

So, nothing more than ambiguous conjecture? Got it.

Well, I'm pretty happy using it and I certainly don't lose any sleep over Facebook having built it. Quite the opposite - I thank them for it! Nobody can take away my rights to freely available MIT licensed code.