Zen project forks Zig, relicenses, and “moves” original license to separate file

Re:Zen project forks Zig, relicenses, and “moves” original l... by gus_massa on Wednesday December 04, 2019 @06:49AM (#21701382)

I think the (hard)fork is legal under the MIT license, but IANAL, so I'm not sure they dotted all their i and crossed all their t. The possibility to fork and change the license is a standard point in the old discussion of GPL vs MIT.

I feel part of that post is unnecessary, like:

> We cannot see a future for Zig where the founder does not allow corporate entities to use and support Zig, so in respecting Mr. Kelley's ideals, we felt forced to fork Zig.

I also don't like that they use their own license "ConnectFree Reference Source License (CF-RSL)". (I can't find a copy of it.) If the idea is to make a corporate friendly fork, why not stick to a standard license? Corporate lawyers hate weird licenses because they have to read them and be sure there are not weird hidden clauses there. To make a corporate friendly fork, I suggest MIT.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Zen project forks Zig, relicenses, and “moves” original l... by andrewflnr on Wednesday December 04, 2019 @10:59AM (#21703266)

Agree on the license, that alone is so stupid that it's (weak) evidence they're being dishonest about their motives.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Zen project forks Zig, relicenses, and “moves” original l... by mobinmob on Wednesday December 04, 2019 @09:45AM (#21702552)

The linux tarball comes with the CF-RSL, an EULA and and an ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.md file that contains 3 licenses and copyrights, including the zig original.

[ Parent | on HN ]