A conversation about open source licenses
gist.github.com
A conversation about open source licenses
1–10 of 35 posts
Re: A conversation about open source licenses
#2It's hard to know anyone's actual intentions from the outside, but I think Zed has a point.
It's interesting that Ryan works for Joyent, who is doing a major push into Node.js services–including "Commercial Node.js distribution" ... I'm not a license expert but it seems that MIT would be better for that.
Re: A conversation about open source licenses
#3I assume this is somehow related the joyent's assumption of copyright on the node code (stewardship).
Is there any background on why this was posted in a gist (and why it was submitted to HN)?
Re: A conversation about open source licenses
#4I assume this is somehow related the joyent's assumption of copyright on the node code (stewardship). Is there any background on why this was posted in a gist (and why it was submitted to HN)?
>> Is there any background on why this was posted in a gist
http://bettween.com/ryah/zedshaw/May-07-2011/May-15-2011/asc
Re: A conversation about open source licenses
#5Can someone explain what was the fuss about ? So Zed was cool to relicense it thinking it was about some project X and got pissed off when he learned it was going to be (also) used in project Y ? WTF ?!
Re: A conversation about open source licenses
#6Can someone explain what was the fuss about ? So Zed was cool to relicense it thinking it was about some project X and got pissed off when he learned it was going to be (also) used in project Y ? WTF ?!
It looks like Zed is pissed about Ryan trying to hide his intentions to profit from Zed's work through Node.js (Node.js has commercial activities attached to it). Zed is not pissed about whether or not Ryan actually profits from it, only the way he appears to be doing it in a sneaky way.
Re: A conversation about open source licenses
#7http-parser is based on parsers from mongrel and/or nginx (at least in parts), yet the LICENSE file says Joyent, Inc. and other Node contributors.... No mention of the original copyright holders (Zed Shaw and/or Igor Sysoev) tsk tsk
Re: A conversation about open source licenses
#8It is sad how this has been misrepresented.
First of all, this was an email conversation between Ryan Dahl and Zed Shaw. That you know. What you probably don't know is that Ryan first posted this tweet [0] about rewriting Zed's http parser. Zed then responded twice [1] & [2], vehemently. Ryan then responded with a single "?" to Zed's outbursts. That is when Zed said this: "@ryah And don't make me bust out the fucking email you sent me trying to trick me into giving you a MIT license. I swear I'll trash you." [3] Then shortly after another attack [4]. Ryan then again responded somewhat confused: "@zedshaw http-parser uses nginx's url parser, and your external c api (it's a good api) but it's not a modified ver. of mongrel's http11. ??" [5] After that he offered up the above link with the email conversation Zed alluded to [6].
If you know anything about the http parser, you would know that it was written by Ryan and is no longer an issue. That is why the license was changed, why give attribution to Zed if he didn't write anything? Not to mention after the above outburst.
The title of this post is wrong, misleading, and linkbait.
[0]: https://twitter.com/ryah/status/69557901546631168
[1]: http://twitter.com/zedshaw/status/69583774119239681
[2]: http://twitter.com/zedshaw/status/69584110305284097
[3]: http://twitter.com/zedshaw/status/69584284339544064
[4]: http://twitter.com/zedshaw/status/69618172252274688
Re: A conversation about open source licenses
#9It is sad how this has been misrepresented. First of all, this was an email conversation between Ryan Dahl and Zed Shaw. That you know. What you probably don't know is that Ryan first posted this tweet [0] about rewriting Zed's http parser. Zed then responded twice [1] & [2], vehemently. Ryan then responded with a single "?" to Zed's outbursts. That is when Zed said this: "@ryah And don't make me bust out the fucking…
http://bettween.com/ryah/zedshaw/May-07-2011/May-15-2011/asc is far more readable ;)
But back on topic... Even if Ryan really rewritten all of the original mongrel's code by hand, then there is still issue with nginx-based portions. Why there is no attribution to Igor Sysoev?
Re: A conversation about open source licenses
#10It is sad how this has been misrepresented. First of all, this was an email conversation between Ryan Dahl and Zed Shaw. That you know. What you probably don't know is that Ryan first posted this tweet [0] about rewriting Zed's http parser. Zed then responded twice [1] & [2], vehemently. Ryan then responded with a single "?" to Zed's outbursts. That is when Zed said this: "@ryah And don't make me bust out the fucking…
http://bettween.com/ryah/zedshaw/May-07-2011/May-15-2011/asc is far more readable ;) But back on topic... Even if Ryan really rewritten all of the original mongrel's code by hand, then there is still issue with nginx-based portions. Why there is no attribution to Igor Sysoev ?
Yeah, but what is the fun in that?
If it was rewritten, with all new code, why would there need to be attribution?