I don’t think believe using GPL will achieve anything. I am a professional developer. If I’m looking for a library for a problem and find one that’s GPL, then I will simply not consider using it. What are the options here?

I could search for a different library with an MIT license. Let’s, for the sake of argument, assume that there are none.

I could ask my boss if I can release all our source code to the public. Yeah, sure. That’s going to happen.

I could ask my boss if I can have a bit of budget to haggle out a license with the library author. That’s a waste of time and money. Hammering out a license agreement across language boundaries and jurisdictions will involve a lot of lawyering and waiting that’s just not worth it. The additional fees would likely even outweigh the agreed payment to the author.

So what’s left? I don’t use a library and program the thing myself. It might take a while, but I’m way cheaper than lawyers. So in the end, GPL won’t do a thing to force a business to support FOSS, but will annoy developers.

That’s why, if I ever am in a position to meaningfully add to FOSS, it will be under the MIT license.

[–] slappyfuck@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It sounds more like you think you are entitled to have access to a library to begin with. Why should one exist that you can exploit in a way that your business wants rather than one that respects freedom—this is where I completely agree with the software freedom folks.

If you work for a private business that is earning profit, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to expect to pay for a library or build it yourself. Why should something else just exist for your business to exploit?

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

It sounds more like you think you are entitled to have access to a library to begin with.

Could you point me to the part of my comment that led you to that conclusion?

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You're being obtuse. Obviously the point above is about the difficulty to actually include GPL libraries in your codebase, not the fact that the company is unwilling to give money. Ever looked at a node_modules folder?

[–] slappyfuck@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

That’s funny that you accused me of being obtuse and then immediately did so. Do you not understand what the “difficulty” of including GPL libraries means? Re-read their comment.

I’m not talking about an unwillingness to “give” money here. They’re treating a gratis library existing for them to include in the codebase as a foregone conclusion.

[–] jfrnz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My favorite option: use the GPL licensed solution to wow your boss by getting the project done fast. Then, the company either gets sued, thereby financially contributing to the project, or you are asked to replace it with your own implementation, giving you job security.

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Or… don’t work at a workplace so toxic that you need to pull these shenanigans.

[–] jfrnz@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Eh, it’s not really so different from the situation you described. I want to support FOSS in my work, but the chances of moving the needle on donations or contributions is slim to none.