Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by seba_dos1 1581 days ago
No, I wouldn't. Most of what I do requires Free Software licenses or sometimes even GPL compatibility, and such licenses are neither free, open nor GPL compatible. For me, such software wouldn't be much different from proprietary freeware.
1 comments
freeloaderz 1581 days ago
So you wouldn't add a test case, new example, or fix a typo in the docs to gain access to an MIT equivalent license?
link
seba_dos1 1581 days ago
It's not MIT equivalent. It it was, it could be relicensed.

In many cases it's not even relevant what I would do or not, because such licenses make it not possible to integrate such code in a project under GPL, or to include it in a free distribution.

Looking at these licenses closer, I wonder if Parity could actually be considered free. Seems to my eye like it could be, but IANAL. For practical purposes, I'd probably consider it same as non-free until it's said to be DFSG-compliant. Prosperity sure isn't free though.

link