Copyright Bouke van der Bijl I do not give anyone permissions to use this tool for any purpose. Don't use it. I’m not interested in changing this license. Please don’t ask.
Somebody with codepilot to check it out?
Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
111–120 of 249 posts
Re: Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
#112I love that all the discussion here is about the license I wrote and not about the actual project, which is a completely terrible idea and something I created as a lark. Why did I not spell this out in the blog post? For my own amusement. I also think it shows that licenses really don't matter all that much as some people think, they are not computer code.
On the Internet, unless you sprinkle your words with emoticons, it is hard to convey irony or amusement using text alone.
You absolutely have the power to end the controversy by switching to a more mainstream license then adding a clear disclaimer like “use at your own risk”.
GitHub currently lists 465 projects that depend on your library, which means more than a handful of devs find it useful.
Re: Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Used by counter on GitHub is at 464. The way it's worded would imply that they are all violating the license? Yes. My read of the situation is not that it's a license that intends to stop people from using it, but rather that it's a license that selects for a specific target audience that doesn't care about copyrights or is anti-copyright. In my opinion, that's a perfectly valid audience to select for, although a l…
I’m anti-copyright. I still wouldn’t use this code, because I don’t want to break the law. Being anti-copyright doesn’t mean you also need to be against due process.
Being willing to break the law doesn't mean you're against due process. Due process is what happens afterwards, that safeguards you from being punished for doing something you have not done.
Re: Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
#114This feels like "Left-pad 2: Electric Boogaloo"
edit: Although, "This is only used in the test (and thus not.compiled and distributed in our binaries)." https://github.com/dapr/dapr/issues/3563#issuecomment-901563...
Re: Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems that you're not interested in suing anyone over this. However, you still don't give people permission to use, not even in small throwaway tests. Which is fair. But your blog post[0] language suggests that you are okay with and even incentivizes people trying this out (even if trying it out might be technically illegal, because it infringes your rights). I think you should have mentioned something about the l…
Pretty funny right?
I found it really funny!
Re: Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
#116Copyright Bouke van der Bijl I do not give anyone permissions to use this tool for any purpose. Don't use it. I’m not interested in changing this license. Please don’t ask.
https://github.com/bouk/monkey/blob/master/LICENSE.md
Then why publish the blog post and put it into a package??
Re: Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
“As a lark” would technically mean you did this while you were a bird. The correct idiom is “on a lark,” though because of so much misusage the average person excuses “as a lark.” Compare “I’m on line” vs “I’m in line,” or “as per usual” vs “per usual” or “as usual.”
Where on earth did you get that notion from? Just because you use a particular phrase does not make it the only or the definitive version. On a lark, for a lark, as a lark, larking about, and so on are all common. It's not some obscure quotation or meaning, it's just a simile comparing with the bird (perceived as happy).
https://grammarist.com/phrase/on-a-lark/
The “lark” in the idiom “on a lark” has nothing to do with a simile to birds. It derives from an old Norse word which means “to play.” https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lark#Etymology_2
Using correct terms helps to communicate effectively. What is wrong with promoting correct use of English? I always appreciate it when my coworkers promote correct programming idioms to me, it helps me become a better programmer.
Re: Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where on earth did you get that notion from? Just because you use a particular phrase does not make it the only or the definitive version. On a lark, for a lark, as a lark, larking about, and so on are all common. It's not some obscure quotation or meaning, it's just a simile comparing with the bird (perceived as happy).
https://grammarist.com/phrase/on-a-lark/ The “lark” in the idiom “on a lark” has nothing to do with a simile to birds. It derives from an old Norse word which means “to play.” https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lark#Etymology_2 Using correct terms helps to communicate effectively. What is wrong with promoting correct use of English? I always appreciate it when my coworkers promote correct programming idioms to me, it hel…
Note that your etymology link agrees with mine (via skylark).
OED cites P.G.Wodehouse (for a lark), and J.Krantz (of a lark).
Re: Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
#119Copyright Bouke van der Bijl I do not give anyone permissions to use this tool for any purpose. Don't use it. I’m not interested in changing this license. Please don’t ask.
https://github.com/bouk/monkey/blob/master/LICENSE.md Then why publish the blog post and put it into a package??
[deleted]
Re: Project includes a dependancy that has a license that forbids its use
#120From the explaining blog post [0] > If you’re not interested in how it works and you just want to do monkey patching, then you can find the library here. Also > Wrapping it up in a nice library > I took the above code and put it in an easy to use library. It supports 32 bit, reversing patches, and patching instance methods. I wrote a couple of examples and put those in the README. Then in the README[1]: > Make sure y…
It's satirical
What is it satirizing?
Or is this just a post-hoc "its just a joke bro. Y u mad?"
Regardless, its your code, do what you want.