@LewisCowper (i.e., what is the valid use case for ‘we want to also support people who use it in closed products’ for an open source OS?)
-
-
@aral I can see why they would do it. Not necessarily the best decision, but if that’s the sacrifice for having it open at all it’s ok by me -
@LewisCowper Why should it be a sacrifice? :) -
@aral but as I keep sending multiple tweets, probably not the best format to have the discussion in. -
@LewisCowper Always happy to chat in longer form (aral@ind.ie)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@dhigit9@LewisCowper@bcantrill Not the least bit interested in “Corporate Open Source” to be entirely honest. And the video is private :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
@aral Plus a lot of companies using it might improve the ecosystem if they give back, which is a separate issue than apache vs gpl -
@LewisCowper With Apache it’s if they give back, with GPL, it’s when they give back. Latter keeps it free (as in freedom) :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@aral Encouraging diversity in tooling and allowing more people to see and use it is good. Plus there’s still a division in tech with gpl2/3 -
@LewisCowper Indeed. Yet once it reaches certain point, I can take it, close it off, pump £10m into further dev & not share my improvements.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.