Thanks for your comments and insights, Jakob.
I just want to shortly assure you that I really liked your emails and your 
I didn't answer/comment further due lack of time.

Because of recent events (2017-03-01) I want to come back to this part:
> Yes, but Google Code was no Github.  Github is the singularity of
> open source development. (As much as I dislike FB but hear me out...)

Before GitHub, was the singular main hoster for FOSS sourcecode.
They lost their status when they bundled the downloads with adware (and 

Always the same story:
Nice little StartUp offers a comfortable, gratis service. Everyone starts using 
Then either the StartUp fails and the service gets shut down,
or it gets sold to investors who want to see more profit with every year.
Then the terms of service get worse, the prices go up, etc., e.g. see BitKeeper 
vs. Linux (the reason we have git now).

On 2017-03-01 GitHub introduced new Terms of Service (which you automatically 
accept by continueing to use their service)
which demands from uploaders to grant GitHub a license. This is legal 
self-defense for GitHub, not unusual or bad in itself,
but they further specifiy this license, which e.g. includes the uploader to 
waive any and all attribution rights.

Basically, when uploading FOSS-licensed content to GitHub, the uploader 
automatically grants GitHub a special license, so actually a case of 
The problem now is, that when the content is copyrighted by other authors 
beside the uploader,
then the uploader cannot (in usual cases) actually grant this license legally 
to GitHub, as most FOSS-licenses forbid sublicensing and/or removal of the 
original attributions.

Some projects already moved away from GitHub because of this.

I don't believe GitHub will take big damage because of this, especially as 
there is no serious contender on the rise.
But it's surely a sign that GitHub is not a singularity from the usual 
development of such things.
It's not an idealistic group of nerds anymore, but a big company (e.g. lookup 
the "github meritocracy" drama).

For the other points mentioned by you and others about picolisp:
Just do it. PicoLisp is MIT-licensed. Action speaks louder than words.

As Lindsay wrote:
> What would be great is to see more of an ecosystem built around the
> picolisp core. Build something awesome with picolisp, document it and share
> it with the world.

I'm on it.


Reply via email to