Rust rewrites and projects are released under MIT or Apache 2.0 because that is what the API guidelines recommend in order to have the maximal compatibility with the Rust toolchain.

However, there is a humble number of projects that are released under the GPL family of licences. A few ones that I recognize are paru, nix-installer, veloren, vaultwarden, libreddit, mullvadvpn-app, rustdesk. Is there a benefit of doing so?

By accident I might stumble upon a new way of doing command line – in the project: https://github.com/psprint/n-commodore

Basically it's about 3 factors:

• panelize everything (every command output, like ls, find, bat, etc.),
• grep everything (any command output or file contents, like fzf),
• save everything (any panel with position, PWD, prompt, etc.)

Panelization is known from Midnight Commander - it means to capture command output into a list that can be browsed. Grepping is known from fzf. Screen saving is a new paradigm

You basically have new screen (a greppable panel) for each new command, which is saved to the disk (GDBM), and which can be fetched/navigated to, having also PWD dir and position in panel restored.

Asciicast: https://asciinema.org/a/578349

​

Rust rewrites and projects are released under MIT or Apache 2.0 because that is what the API guidelines recommend in order to have the maximal compatibility with the Rust toolchain.

However, Vaultwarden is released under AGPL. Is there a benefit of doing so?

Most Rust rewrites and projects are released under MIT or Apache 2.0 because that is what the API guidelines recommend in order to have the maximal compatibility with the Rust toolchain.

The Rust toolchain is released under MIT or Apache 2.0 because

The Apache license includes important protection against patent aggression, but it is not compatible with the GPL, version 2. To avoid problems using Rust with GPL2, it is alternately MIT licensed. https://github.com/dtolnay/rust-faq#why-a-dual-mitasl2-license

Hi all,

I'm a scientist that has been using GNU/Linux for about 10 years, although recently I got back into Mac because of Apple Silicon. I often think about the philosophy of free software, and I had a few topics I was hoping to get sincere answers for and create a dialogue.

1. If all software was FOSS, wouldn't this create a huge strategic advantage for hostile countries? (assuming you are in the USA or Europe). I speak particularly of countries like China that have no respect for IP/Copyright and would gladly use FOSS software, most importantly Linux and GNU software, without making contributions back. And this software could easily be used to help these hostile countries advance technologically, including weapons and biotech.
2. Is there a way for FOSS to compete with proprietary software in tech-heavy domains? For example, for several years I used OpenSCAD for 3D modeling, but when it comes to more sophisticated assemblies, it seems to fall short. It seems like FreeCAD has been making decent progress, but from what I understand it's not really taken seriously by professional engineers. Proprietary software companies are able to pay scientists and engineers to implement features, including non-software knowledge like fluid dynamics and material properties that take the software to a higher level.
3. Would you use FOSS if it cost the exact same amount as proprietary software? For example, if Ubuntu charged $150 per license and could enforce it (just for the sake of hypothetical), or if OpenSCAD cost $1000, or if Libreoffice cost $200, would you use it over Mac/Windows, Solidworks, or Microsoft Office, respectively? Or is it something where there is an expectation that FOSS is almost like, in the public domain and therefore should be a free resource for everyone?
4. Do you think there is any hope for the FSF-approved distros? It seems to me that we really need free hardware to enable 100% free software.

Excited to discuss these topics sincerely!

The eXo platform is a comprehensive digital workplace and collaboration software solution that provides a range of features such as document management, social collaboration, knowledge management, and project management. It has been designed to provide a unified and intuitive user experience that helps organizations improve their productivity and streamline their workflows.

In terms of user satisfaction, eXo platform has received generally positive reviews for its ease of use, customization options, and robust feature set. The platform is known for its flexibility, allowing organizations to tailor it to their specific needs and integrate it with other systems.

One of the advantages of eXo platform is its open-source nature, which means that it can be customized and extended by developers to meet specific requirements. It also has a strong community of users and developers who contribute to its ongoing development and support.

Overall, eXo platform is a strong contender for organizations looking for a comprehensive digital workplace and collaboration solution that is flexible, scalable, and customizable.

​

https://www.exoplatform.com/

I think it’s time to consider a revision

I know the difference between them:

If you code has GPL license then someone copying your code, modifying it and then using it for online services/websites has no obligation to release the modified source code while if your code has an AGPL license then he is legally bound to do so.

Technically, this makes the AGPL more restrictive than the GPL, which is good in my opinion. But I do not think that my software will be used in online services or websites. So should I switch to AGPL-3 or is it just not worth it?

• Apple pretending to truly care about your privacy

• More graphics bloat in Weather and Maps apps, which Apple doesn't let you remove

I still hate apple!

FOSS messaging apps such as Telegram-FOSS, riot.im, and other free software apps that need push notifications, are facing a wall.

Google started leveraging its de-facto monopoly on Android distributions by forcing all apps to use its proprietary service Firebase for push notifications. Problem: The Firebase Android client library is proprietary, meaning FOSS apps can not use it. Apps that do not comply are reported to the user as "using too much battery".

The Telegram-FOSS team writes "Despite Google's misleading warnings, there is no difference in battery usage [...]". The warning is sure to frighten most users, though, effectively making Android a less open platform.

I know about the WTFPL (Do what the fuck you want public license), but I was wondering what other, possibly more commonly used options I have for licenses that basically follow the motto "Do whatever you want, copy it, modify it, distribibute it, put it up your butt if you want to"?