Octotree – Proprietary Firefox extension contains AGPL-licensed code

Re:Octotree – Proprietary Firefox extension contains AGPL-li... by freedomben on Saturday October 31, 2020 @05:24PM (#24955316)

I agree with nearly everything you've said, except I would suggest that the maintainer himself started the framing of him as The Bad Guy.

The thread has changed a lot since I first saw it, but right out of the gate the issuer opener was matter of fact and mostly respectful, and the maintainer called him a spammer and a troll and deleted his and other's stuff.

I can't imagine you could do much better if you wanted people to think you're The Bad Guy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Octotree – Proprietary Firefox extension contains AGPL-li... by kordlessagain on Saturday October 31, 2020 @08:06PM (#24956292)

It's been my observation over the years that there are people who troll for this sort of thing and they are good at saying things nicely but then they don't actually meet the criteria of being anyone who had their "rights" violated or are willing to do anything other than "go away" when the license is finally reapplied after harassment over a minutia with no actual harm being proved to an individual. They may be technically correct about the license concerns, but the absoluteness and blaming they do isn't worth the outcomes.

I just closed the repo I'm working on to the public and will not be making it Open Source moving forward as I originally intended. I've been through this before myself, and it's just best to leave my code unlicensed and copyrighted by me. I'm grateful this ugly beast reared its head and reminded me how much vitriol non-contributors can deliver.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Octotree – Proprietary Firefox extension contains AGPL-li... by laughinghan on Saturday October 31, 2020 @09:46PM (#24956665)

I just closed the repo I'm working on to the public and will not be making it Open Source moving forward as I originally intended.

I'm really sorry to hear that, and while it is obviously 100% up to you, I hope you to reconsider.

Every contribution to The Commons furthers the public good. Unlike the busybodies who care more about lecturing people about following the "rules" of "Open Source" to the letter, than about the spirit of fostering contributions to The Commons to further the public good, you clearly understand what actually matters.

Don't let the annoying minority keep you from doing something you know will make a positive difference in the world. If you set clear boundaries and stay matter-of-fact, the public overall will back you.

In the same spirit as the 4 "non-Free-Culture" Creative Commons licenses, I encourage you to check out non-open-source PolyForm software licenses, including a noncommercial license, a free trial license, etc: https://github.com/polyformproject/polyform-licenses#license...

Every contribution to The Commons furthers the public good, regardless of whether it's technically "Open Source" according to the Debian mailing list.

[ Parent | on HN ]