UPDATE: I found this issue explaining the relicensing of rust game engine Bevy to MIT + Apache 2.0 dual. Tldr: A lot of rust projects are MIT/Apache 2.0 so using those licenses is good for interoperability and upstreaming. MIT is known and trusted and had great success in projects like Godot.

ORIGINAL POST:

RedoxOS, uutils, zoxide, eza, ripgrep, fd, iced, orbtk,…

It really stands out considering that in FOSS software the GPL or at least the LGPL for toolkits is the most popular license

Most of the programs I listed are replacements for stuff we have in the Linux ecosystem, which are all licensed under the (L)GPL:

uutils, zoxide, eza, ripgrep, fd -> GNU coreutils (GPL)

iced, orbtk -> GTK, QT (LGPL)

RedoxOS -> Linux kernel, most desktop environments like GNOME, KDE etc. all licensed GPL as much as possible

  • snowe@programming.dev
    222·
    11 months ago

    I have never heard anyone claim that GPL or LGPL are the most popular licenses for tools. From what I’ve seen it’s the opposite. MIT is by far the most popular by an insane margin. So much so that when I see an lgpl license I’m surprised.

    • jackOP
      12·
      11 months ago

      Most of the rust projects I listed are replacements for stuff in the Linux ecosystem which are licensed (L)GPL. The most popular toolkits by far are GTK and QT, both LGPL

      • snowe@programming.dev
        11·
        11 months ago

        ok, that I can understand, if they’re only considering “tools” to be those on lgpl systems themselves.

        • rah@feddit.uk
          2·
          11 months ago

          Firstly, GNU/Linux systems aren’t just “lgpl” systems. Secondly, out of curiosity what were you considering “tools” to be?

          • snowe@programming.dev
            2·
            11 months ago

            Anything you use on your computer to help you complete a job. Docker, ripgrep, IntelliJ, graalvm, javac, cargo, Zulip, etc. Thinking that tools are just contained to be what comes bundled with your os is a weird take to me.