Timeline for pleroma list by gnusocialjp

@EdBoatConnoisseur @waifu @mansalia That software is under no license - there is no statement as to the license, nor a copyright header in any of the files (both the makefile and the .sh file needs a license header really).

microsoft github intentionally encourages people to fail to license software, as they love increasing the amount of proprietary software in the world.

The "license picker" also intentionally doesn't even let the cattle select GPLv3-only or GPLv3-or-later - just "GPLv3".

Also looks like bash to me - should be /bin/bash not /bin/sh

Embed this notice

翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 17-Oct-2025 01:52:03 JST

翠星石

in reply to

waka

@wakarimasen eVIl mode.

Embed this notice

翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 17-Oct-2025 01:50:47 JST

翠星石

in reply to

Hyperhidrosis

@Hyperhidrosis Charged with the intent to commit wrongthink.

Embed this notice

翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 17-Oct-2025 01:42:47 JST

翠星石

in reply to

Hyperhidrosis

@Hyperhidrosis That's called entrapment and what are they going to be charged on if no assault occurred?

Embed this notice

翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 17-Oct-2025 01:37:41 JST

翠星石

in reply to

@rain @mansalia The software license is not something that can be fixed and made immutable without setting the project up to fail - eventually flaws in the license is found, or a court will make some error that invalidates part of existing licenses, which can easily kill a project unless there's an escape raft.

It may not matter if you are the only copyright holder and you never accept commits - as you'll be able to relicense to the GPLv4-only if that ever comes out - but if you accept commits, good luck regaining contact with all the copyright holders even 2 years down the line.

The FSF doesn't have permission to write whatever they want if the GPLv4 is necessary - the GPLv3 does say; "Such new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns."

A project is not required to except a future version until it exists either - as per the GPLv3; "If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future versions of the GNU General Public License can be used, that proxy’s public statement of acceptance of a version permanently authorizes you to choose that version for the Program."

GPLv3-or-later doesn't mean you are licensing under a future license - if the GPLv4 comes out and you don't like it, you'll be able to keep the project as GPLv3-or-later while maintaining compatibility, or change it to GPLv3-only (note that this generally one-way only and breaks compatibility).

Embed this notice

翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 17-Oct-2025 01:29:26 JST

翠星石

in reply to