> This was a good step. But you will not admit calling it was loaded to call people who prefer legal clarity ornery?
I did not intend to call the person ornery, I was asking if it was that ornery to them to have to care about getting sued, and pay attention to license terms, basically. This is one area where I think there is a meaningful distinction between libraries and end-user products.
> Treating legal documents seriously is not just principle.
Treating them seriously is one thing, automatically dismissing anything that doesn't provide unfettered rights is another. I understand the high value of that in certain contexts, but should those have claim to all of "open source"?
I did not intend to call the person ornery, I was asking if it was that ornery to them to have to care about getting sued, and pay attention to license terms, basically. This is one area where I think there is a meaningful distinction between libraries and end-user products.
> Treating legal documents seriously is not just principle.
Treating them seriously is one thing, automatically dismissing anything that doesn't provide unfettered rights is another. I understand the high value of that in certain contexts, but should those have claim to all of "open source"?