Live data from Hacker News

ButterDB

pypi.python.org

1–10 of 45 posts

Re: ButterDB

#2
This is a potentially useful project but I could never use it for fear of "FuckItDB" appearing in an exception call trace that a client might see.

Names don't have to mean anything, but certain names are still unacceptable.

Re: ButterDB

#4
post #2

This is a potentially useful project but I could never use it for fear of "FuckItDB" appearing in an exception call trace that a client might see. Names don't have to mean anything, but certain names are still unacceptable.

Based on the "don't use this for anything important" note, I think that's probably intentional. If someone spends the time to build this into something production-ready, they can change the name, too.

Re: ButterDB

#5
post #2

This is a potentially useful project but I could never use it for fear of "FuckItDB" appearing in an exception call trace that a client might see. Names don't have to mean anything, but certain names are still unacceptable.

According to this commit, the name was changed to butterdb about three months ago.

https://github.com/Widdershin/butterdb/commit/6a73c9199d53f5...

Digging on PyPI, I found the new package named butterdb. The version is bumped from .13 to .14, though that might just be the name change. In any case, it might be a good idea to change the submission to reflect the new name and the new package.

https://pypi.python.org/pypi/butterdb/0.1.4

Re: ButterDB

#6

I'm surprised this was released under the MIT License. The WTFPL would be more appropriate. http://www.wtfpl.net/

It would have been more inappropriate. Which could be the goal, I don't know.

But more seriously, it's legally risky to have anything to do with code licensed under WTFPL because it does not actually specify that you can do anything with the code without possible legal reprisals, from which no protection is offered. Probably safe to point and laugh at it, though.

Re: ButterDB

#7
post #6

I'm surprised this was released under the MIT License. The WTFPL would be more appropriate. http://www.wtfpl.net/

It would have been more inappropriate. Which could be the goal, I don't know. But more seriously, it's legally risky to have anything to do with code licensed under WTFPL because it does not actually specify that you can do anything with the code without possible legal reprisals, from which no protection is offered. Probably safe to point and laugh at it, though.

Although the WTFPL website (http://www.wtfpl.net/faq/) does note somewhat ominously that it hasn't been tested in courts, it seems legitimate enough to me. Is there any evidence outside of its lack of history in court that would indicate it isn't suitable for production use?

EDIT: gnu.org also says "We do not recommend this license" ,pointing to the Apache license as providing better protection against 'patent treachery'. (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html)

Re: ButterDB

#10
post #7
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would have been more inappropriate. Which could be the goal, I don't know. But more seriously, it's legally risky to have anything to do with code licensed under WTFPL because it does not actually specify that you can do anything with the code without possible legal reprisals, from which no protection is offered. Probably safe to point and laugh at it, though.

Although the WTFPL website ( http://www.wtfpl.net/faq/ ) does note somewhat ominously that it hasn't been tested in courts, it seems legitimate enough to me. Is there any evidence outside of its lack of history in court that would indicate it isn't suitable for production use? EDIT: gnu.org also says "We do not recommend this license" ,pointing to the Apache license as providing better protection against 'patent trea…

Track down what 'DannyBee has to say about WTFPL and licenses like it. There are good reasons not to use it even if you don't care what happens with your code.
Post reply on HN