• davel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Because of course it would.

    I swear the move to replace the GNU ecosystem with Rust tooling has more to do with a corporate EEE push to remove all libre licensing than with memory safety or anything else.

    • SmokeInFog@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I swear the move to replace the GNU ecosystem with Rust tooling has more to do with a corporate EEE push to remove all libre licensing than with memory safety or anything else.

      Nailed it here, imo

      • davel@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Which is very frustrating, because retiring C & C++ is long overdue IMO, but for reasons unknown to me, the Rust community is strongly against copyleft licensing.

        • Kay Ohtie@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 minutes ago

          Wouldn’t surprise if Creative Commons had something to do with this. The copyleft licenses of it, of anything more restrictive basically than MIT and “attribution”, are listed as “restrictive” and “not open” or something. I think coupled with the complicated legal language versus “idk, whatever man” doesn’t help for lots of new projects.

          That said… Most of the stuff I’ve done has been so “idk, man, I made a thing for me and figured others might benefit” that I just gave it the MIT license for that reason. And it may just be as simple as that reasoning.

        • Jarmund@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Remember when under biden they passed this memory safety thingy? Which it implicitly, discreetly advocated for the use of rust nonetheless

          Rust might be a psyop hahaha