A few people pointed out that many rust projects were MIT licensed and since then I indeed have seen MIT licensed projects everywhere in Rust. Then I found the link of this post and it looks like MIT was by far the most popular license in all of opensource in 2023.

Any ideas why?

  • popcar2
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    MIT is the de-facto license that says “Do what you want with the software, just give me credit. Also, I don’t owe you anything”.

    It lets people do basically anything with it but protects you from:

    • People who would steal your project and claim they were the original creators (your name and copyright info is filled in the license which they have to include and mention)

    • Any sort of liability or warranty - people can’t blame you for any damage done by your software

      • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        those are less permissive. mit license says “you want to make a new version and sell it? go ahead! be my guest” think of it as being the apache license with fewer words

        • hitwright@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          4 days ago

          You can sell GPL software, even without any changes. The less permission part would be “You want to close-source it and not contribute back? Go ahead!”

      • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 days ago

        GPL forces those who fork the project to open-source their contributions; same for MPL though GPL requires open-sourcing more things. EUPL is a bit obscure.