The Facebook has announced that it will release its popular open source React, Jest, Flow and Immutable.js projects under the MIT license, abandoning the Facebook BSD+Patents license for those projects.
Facebook re-licensing React.js is good news for all you, WordPress developers.
From my point of view, there is an understanding and couple of reasonable facts about the arguments and reasons why a company like Facebook, would still preserve its right on its own property, which is still misunderstood as being open-source.
First, we all know what open-source means you take something from the community or from the earth (like water or wind) and you make use of it for your purposes. Any of us invented the computers, I guess. Open source enables a development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process.
Secondly, you distribute this source code that you have developed, through the proper powered distribution channels the community uses - such as repositories - or embedded in the same application, knowing you that third parties can and should inspect it and review it, with the proper tool. We do all agree with the transparency ethical attribute.
But then, after investing you time and licensing the code, there is the notated open-sourced obligation to allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
Here comes trouble.
Derived works means giving free drinks around to your competitors, face it before you full your mouth with kind words.
In the case your code is the root upon your company stands up -- and some companies, like Facebook, have been building, writing and even litigating for code reasons unnecessarily, over the last decade -- licensing under heavy manners may be negative for you and all your team. Your society does not fill well into the open society and its enemies.
Negativeness solely based on the vision and added value you company holds. Do not misunderstood me, please. This is nothing against public wealth, but against the vision some mates like that Proudhon has on private property. A devastating vision product of a lunatic visionary who wrote in french language. And this vision impregnates the idea of open-source.
Interfaces, communication or integration, are built in our era mostly using CMS tools, no matter if they are open nor closed, neither free ( the last in the list is the term you wrongly associate with source).
For this purpose, the move The Facebook has done changing its license terms is good for the community. it means some other methods of revenue have to be found. and means that your social platform, maybe, just maybe, one day will no longer be free of use in terms of subscription.
React a Javascript library to build interfaces, now is open source.
Immutable, a functional tool for functional programming, is also free of use, under the Apache License terms.
Community, it's time to work to make better these tools. No bugs,please.
Even the infamous K. Marx showed a little respect and consideration for private property, if property does not equals to alienation. Freedom of trade, of a choice, presupposes property rights. Being materialists or Aristotelian if you rather prefer it, every man and woman is responsible of its own property, body and soul, which we all know it come inherited from our ancestors.
Facebook re-licensing React.js is good news for all you, WordPress developers.
From my point of view, there is an understanding and couple of reasonable facts about the arguments and reasons why a company like Facebook, would still preserve its right on its own property, which is still misunderstood as being open-source.
First, we all know what open-source means you take something from the community or from the earth (like water or wind) and you make use of it for your purposes. Any of us invented the computers, I guess. Open source enables a development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process.
Secondly, you distribute this source code that you have developed, through the proper powered distribution channels the community uses - such as repositories - or embedded in the same application, knowing you that third parties can and should inspect it and review it, with the proper tool. We do all agree with the transparency ethical attribute.
But then, after investing you time and licensing the code, there is the notated open-sourced obligation to allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
Here comes trouble.
Derived works means giving free drinks around to your competitors, face it before you full your mouth with kind words.
In the case your code is the root upon your company stands up -- and some companies, like Facebook, have been building, writing and even litigating for code reasons unnecessarily, over the last decade -- licensing under heavy manners may be negative for you and all your team. Your society does not fill well into the open society and its enemies.
Negativeness solely based on the vision and added value you company holds. Do not misunderstood me, please. This is nothing against public wealth, but against the vision some mates like that Proudhon has on private property. A devastating vision product of a lunatic visionary who wrote in french language. And this vision impregnates the idea of open-source.
Interfaces, communication or integration, are built in our era mostly using CMS tools, no matter if they are open nor closed, neither free ( the last in the list is the term you wrongly associate with source).
For this purpose, the move The Facebook has done changing its license terms is good for the community. it means some other methods of revenue have to be found. and means that your social platform, maybe, just maybe, one day will no longer be free of use in terms of subscription.
React a Javascript library to build interfaces, now is open source.
Immutable, a functional tool for functional programming, is also free of use, under the Apache License terms.
Community, it's time to work to make better these tools. No bugs,please.
Addenda
Even the infamous K. Marx showed a little respect and consideration for private property, if property does not equals to alienation. Freedom of trade, of a choice, presupposes property rights. Being materialists or Aristotelian if you rather prefer it, every man and woman is responsible of its own property, body and soul, which we all know it come inherited from our ancestors.
Now it is certainly easy to say to the single individual what Aristotle has already said: You have been begotten by your father and your mother; therefore in you the mating of two human beings – a species-act of human beings – has produced the human being.You, your choice, your code is your child. Being you in the community the ancestors.
