Why are all the rust projects MIT licensed? - eviltoast

UPDATE: I found this issue explaining the relicensing of rust game engine Bevy to MIT + Apache 2.0 dual. Tldr: A lot of rust projects are MIT/Apache 2.0 so using those licenses is good for interoperability and upstreaming. MIT is known and trusted and had great success in projects like Godot.

ORIGINAL POST:

RedoxOS, uutils, zoxide, eza, ripgrep, fd, iced, orbtk,…

It really stands out considering that in FOSS software the GPL or at least the LGPL for toolkits is the most popular license

Most of the programs I listed are replacements for stuff we have in the Linux ecosystem, which are all licensed under the (L)GPL:

uutils, zoxide, eza, ripgrep, fd -> GNU coreutils (GPL)

iced, orbtk -> GTK, QT (LGPL)

RedoxOS -> Linux kernel, most desktop environments like GNOME, KDE etc. all licensed GPL as much as possible

  • snowe@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    ok, that I can understand, if they’re only considering “tools” to be those on lgpl systems themselves.

    • rah@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Firstly, GNU/Linux systems aren’t just “lgpl” systems. Secondly, out of curiosity what were you considering “tools” to be?

      • snowe@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Anything you use on your computer to help you complete a job. Docker, ripgrep, IntelliJ, graalvm, javac, cargo, Zulip, etc. Thinking that tools are just contained to be what comes bundled with your os is a weird take to me.