• rezad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    as I said in last post, I only see copyleft as a viable alternative. too many dev efforts forked and privatized. android should have been a warning. but many devs just think open source is enough. and they still think getting adapted by big corporation will not change the direction of projects.

    I am personally going in the direction of testing and helping only copyleft projects. so I skipped RedoxOS. even-though I like rust and new microkernel OSes.

    If I am going to give my time to a project (small as it is) I don’t want it to end up like android.

    • Lev@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      I completely agree, and a strong copyleft licence is something that GPLv3 does much better than its predecessor, which is unfortunately why it has not been adopted by the Linux kernel. I foolishly assumed that GrapheneOS, given the values it professes, would be distributed under the GPLv3 licence, but I have now discovered that this is not the case, in a move that I frankly cannot understand. Hope that changes in the near future, but it’s not very likely to happen I guess