anthoniix

True, but I still think it would be worth pursuing. I think a file based copyleft approach provides enough of a benefit to justify it.

Wine is under LGPL, a similar license. So yes, I think so.

Thanks

🐷🐷🐷

The problem with this is that while true, the solution for lower emissions will look different for every place.

Based

Bro this is my exact setup, damn

Me rn with bikes. I just got into bikes and a couple days later I'm scouring through my county's website for trail maps, looking at what public transit is being funded, doing research on bikes, planning locations to bike to, and buying equipment.

With this license in particular, nothing. The license makes it so that if you modify the source code of a file you have to release that source code upon distribution. However, if you don't modify the source code, you don't have to release it. This allows it to be packaged with proprietary code, as opposed to the hard copyleft licenses, which are "viral".

If DXVK were to ship with the GPL license, anything that touches it, even beyond a file level, would have to be open source upon distribution. This would probably kill the project, so that's why I think MPL is a better option.

They do, which is why Apple was apple to take their code and close it down.

Dope, I love adwaita

Bro... why