undefined | Better HN

0 pointsspiffyk16d ago0 comments

That is also my understanding. My personal theory is that many corporate compliance departments (or whoever is in charge of this at a particular place) just disallow any *GPL use in their company, regardless of whether it would actually cause problems, so this is an attempt to "unblock" the library for those. Instead of, you know, educating people about the nuances of different copyleft licenses.

0 comments

orthoxerox15d ago

Perhaps you are right. I work for a company right now that has a smarter than average legal4IT department and they ask sensible questions about every piece of FLOSS code you want to bring in:

   - what is the license?
   - is it a program or a library?
   - do you plan to use it as-is or modify it?
   - do you plan to include it in our products or is it for internal use only?

But I have also worked for a company that simply had "if MIT, BSD, Apache, ISC, MPL, zlib then OK else notOK" as a policy.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsspiffyk16d ago0 comments

0 comments

orthoxerox15d ago

Perhaps you are right. I work for a company right now that has a smarter than average legal4IT department and they ask sensible questions about every piece of FLOSS code you want to bring in:

   - what is the license?
   - is it a program or a library?
   - do you plan to use it as-is or modify it?
   - do you plan to include it in our products or is it for internal use only?

But I have also worked for a company that simply had "if MIT, BSD, Apache, ISC, MPL, zlib then OK else notOK" as a policy.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse