291–300 of 391 posts
I really have no idea why react is so popular with such a silly license. I agree with this move. There are plenty of OSS projects out there without patent thing attached to its license so no reason to use react.
+ (not saying React is objectively better than alternatives, only that if you believe it's better then the statement is true for you)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Open sourcing the spam filter will only help spammers. It is unlikely that it would work on an individual server with small amount of traffic. Instead of trying to make a perfect spam filter we should abandon outdated inreliable mail transfer protocol.
What would a spam-resistant successor to today's email protocols look like? Is such a thing in the works by someone?
RocksDB has fixed this https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/commit/3c327ac2d0fd50bbd... now and moved to Apache / GPL dual license.
LOL facebook, move fast and break things. this one was FAST :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Considering almost every single large tech company is using React, presumably there's not much reason for concern? IANAL. " Actually, React is banned at a number of them, and i've personally discussed the issue with a number of fairly concerned counsel. So for better or for worse, i don't believe this is as simple as you make it out to be.
Off the top of my head big users of React include: * Apple (their entire dev docs site is built in it, and they've hosted Bay Area React user meet-ups) * Twitter (for their mobile web) * Microsoft (parts of Visual Studio use it) * Netflix (all over their frontend stack) ...as well as Dropbox, AirBnb, Venmo... So whilst I don't doubt you've discussed it with concerned counsel, there are huge corporations deploying Rea…
Also, it's my opinion that the companies like AirBNB who use it are not considering that it will complicate acquisition by another party. They are basically taking themselves out of contention for purchase by a company that is in direct competition with FB. Maybe, evidently, they don't care but I just hope everyone using it is thinking about such things.
I really have no idea why react is so popular with such a silly license. I agree with this move. There are plenty of OSS projects out there without patent thing attached to its license so no reason to use react.
Considering almost every single large tech company is using React, presumably there's not much reason for concern? IANAL. But you're not wrong, preact is a great alternative to react and it comes with a permissive license.
How did you arrive at that conclusion?
Why would I care about patents if I'm outside the US? Software patents are not even valid where I live.
So many of these questions would be easier to answer if anyone knew the patents FB actually has obtained on this technology.
I really have no idea why react is so popular with such a silly license. I agree with this move. There are plenty of OSS projects out there without patent thing attached to its license so no reason to use react.
You are licensed to use React even if you never agreed to whatever is in the PATENTS file. The reading where to use a source code is meant only to compile it, maybe admire the compiled artifact but never to put it anywhere near an executable environment seems pretty far-fetched to me.
Please can someone paraphrase the implications of this. It's hard for me to understand.
LEGAL-303 (the issue linked here) was opened to ensure that we were legally clear to do that. The answer of "no" basically means that a project such as Cassandra:
- Can create a pluggable storage engine that enables RocksDB
- Can not have the RocksDB implementation of that plugin in an Apache repo
There were about half a dozen other ASF projects (Kafka, Samza, etc) that had some reference to RocksDB in their source, that likely would have been impacted.
There are about 50 ASF projects that seem to have some reference to React in their source, which (as this HN comment section clearly noticed) is much more heavily used, and seems to scare more people.
The RocksDB team has already re-licensed the project to make it compatible.
Whether or not that happens with React will determine the apache projects' reactions - a product like CouchDB, which uses react for its database user interface, may have to strip it out (or use a drop-in alternative) before their next release, which is probably a LOT of work for someone.
Am I reading this right that Apache's unwillingness to use rocksdb under the custom license pressured Facebook into switching to Apache || GPLv2? That is pretty cool!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, anecdotally speaking of course, my company does work for most of the major (a) banks, (b) telcos and (c) insurance companies in Canada, and the majority of them are moving from Angular 1.x to React (because Angular 4 is a mess) for their front-end work, both on the public and secure side of things. Hopefully they've all done their due diligence..
What sort of things would banks, telcos, and insurance companies typically patent? These don't strike me as innovation-oriented companies. If you don't have any patents, you're not really risking anything using React.
Bank of America was ranked 124th for its number of U.S. patents granted in 2016.
http://www.ipo.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/2016_Top-300-P...