|
|
|
|
|
by ekjhgkejhgk
217 days ago
|
|
> The ideologically forked Forgejo made some license changes Lets be clear. These "some license changes" that you reference was Forgejo forked Gitea and replaced MIT license with GPLv3. Forgejo doesn't want to be contributing to receiving effort from contributors into a project that then gets re-used, re-branded, and exploited by a big corp. By making the project copyleft they ensured that the contributions stay Free. This was an ethical move. Gitea on the other hand doesn't mind sucking up free-of-charge contributions and handing them to a company to build their walled garden around. |
|
The issue with deviating from the upstream license is that only the code author can upstream a patch, since GPLv3 cannot be changed by a non-author of the code to MIT. Resulting in less being patched upstream, and so more merge conflicts, the maintenance burden I was talking about.