It's literally no work, and you just get reality inline with what you are already claiming. So you know what you are doing I guess. Your little project would never had made the front page here without the open source label.

"Many hours later" is a great way to make it sound like a lot of time passed, but the creator said less than 24 hours ago they were open to adding a license and then several users accused him of essentially kicking puppies to death because it wasn't done yet.

He expressed anxiety and unfamiliarity with adding a license he didn't understand. Not to mention multiple users started arguing over the best license, further highlighting why he shouldn't just trust random internet comments and actually look into it. You're going to harass him for it? Do you own his time for the next week because he made a post on HN? Because that attitude is way more harmful to OSS than what you're up in arms about.

Furthermore, this is colloquially open-source to most people, and you're hung up on semantics. Anybody that needs to care about a license can look and see if one is there. If it's so simple to understand a license and add it to your project in such a short span of time, surely it's simple to check for the existence of one in the first place.

nicely written, thank you for kind words

chill, be nice

You could have solved this issue. Your coding fingers turned into complaining fingers. If you really had a problem, you should have opened a PR with a license instead of demanding that OP do it on your timeline.

>Yeah yeah yeah, I am hurting open source, my apology to open source

Not a great response. Do you know where you are right now?

Do they know who they dare talking to?! That tone, scandal!! Should know his/her place the unrespectful puny fella!

Maybe I am just waiting for somebody to open PR for adding license cause it looks like everybody is lawyer these days

Ah, well, if that's all: https://github.com/solcloud/Counter-Strike/pull/28

(It's kinda weird, because to make a PR, I had to make a fork, and then I added the licence to my fork, even though I'm not allowed to pick the licence, but )

It makes me want to start several PRs with conflicting licenses.

bring it :D now I thinks about suing anybody forking repo with licence change :D no seriously it is merged now so world is safe again :)

They went with a more open license. Try to do better next time with your license choices. GNU is not nearly as open as the "DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE."

https://github.com/solcloud/Counter-Strike/pull/27/files

Glad they did, because now my fork illegally adding a licence is legal again. Phew!

this is awesome :D

Just FWI, it's not illegal to add an incorrect license to a repository you don't have the rights to. It's simply a lie. The copyright notice is just a statement from the author, it doesn't per se define the terms under which the project is distributed. What defines them is the fact that it's the author who put the file there.

Heh, fair enough I suppose, though it's definitely not very nice to make people believe that I can give them permission to do things, when I don't.

What license do you want to share your work under? MIT? GPL? There's a couple of trade-offs in that choice.

Github has an overview of some of your options: https://github.com/readme/guides/open-source-licensing