Can someone explain why this is good news? As I understood it, the former license was as permissive but additionally to that included a patent grant?
Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
61–70 of 528 posts
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#62That was incredibly unexpected. Facebook may very well end up in the majority's good graces with this move. I wonder how some of the bigger players will react (no pun intended) after their abandonment of React in lieu of Vue or some other framework. Interesting times indeed.
>Facebook may very well end up in the majority's good graces with this move. Really? They are doing the minimum possible to prevent an exodus from their stack after a public outcry.
React is pretty popular already. FB only really needs to change the license to keep the growth.
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#63Wait, this doesn’t solve anything. They replaced BSD with MIT, which are basically the same license and then they removed any explicit patent grant. So this means the user is actually granted less rights then before.
Am I missing something or does this make zero sense?
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#64Props to Facebook! A wise move given recent community sentiment against Facebook OSS. I will be glad to continue using Facebook OSS software.
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#65Wait, so they're replacing a license that has a dodgy patent grant that everyone distrusted, with a license that doesn't have a patent grant at all? Why not Apache?
Yeah, exactly, what does this actually accomplish besides putting the user in a worse situation where they are no longer given any sort of patent grant?
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#66Is the MIT license considered to come with an implicit patent grant?
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#67Thank you, Wordpress.[1] [1] https://ma.tt/2017/09/on-react-and-wordpress/
I doubt it was related. The wheels to get this in motion must have started months in advanced, probably around the time ASF started advising against this license (labeling at as Category-X [1]) [1] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
They had doubled down on their licensing decision on Aug 18th specifically citing Apache: https://code.facebook.com/posts/112130496157735/explaining-r...
This is very clearly a response to WordPress. Nicely played Matt.
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#68That was incredibly unexpected. Facebook may very well end up in the majority's good graces with this move. I wonder how some of the bigger players will react (no pun intended) after their abandonment of React in lieu of Vue or some other framework. Interesting times indeed.
>Facebook may very well end up in the majority's good graces with this move. Really? They are doing the minimum possible to prevent an exodus from their stack after a public outcry.
There was no sign of an exodus. That’s ludicrously hyperbolic.
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
See the fourth paragraph. > This shift naturally raises questions about the rest of Facebook's open source projects. Many of our popular projects will keep the BSD + Patents license for now. We're evaluating those projects' licenses too, but each project is different and alternative licensing options will depend on a variety of factors.
So the list of packages they're truly open sourcing is intentionally small, then. They're only truly open sourcing the ones that are very popular and that had a huge amount of outcry over the license. That makes it worse.
> That makes it worse.
In what way does re-licensing their most popular packages make it worse? It says they're evaluating. Doesn't say no and as demonstrated here it doesn't mean they wont change their mind later.
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
See the fourth paragraph. > This shift naturally raises questions about the rest of Facebook's open source projects. Many of our popular projects will keep the BSD + Patents license for now. We're evaluating those projects' licenses too, but each project is different and alternative licensing options will depend on a variety of factors.
So the list of packages they're truly open sourcing is intentionally small, then. They're only truly open sourcing the ones that are very popular and that had a huge amount of outcry over the license. That makes it worse.
Of course its intentional, unless you truely thought they forgot about React Native.
The common thread here is that these libraries are often used together - changing React's license wouldn't have helped if they're also using Flow and Jest.