jack

People who use GPLv3 want the code to stay open/libre under any circumstances. If this is the goal, why not use the AGPL instead, even for applications which are not served over a network?

This takes away the possibility that people integrate parts of your program into a proprietary network application, even if this seems improbable. There's nothing to loose with using this license, but potentially some gain.

Only reason I can think of is that AGPL is less known and trusted which may harm adoption.

UPDATE: I found this issue explaining the relicensing of rust game engine Bevy to MIT + Apache 2.0 dual. Tldr: A lot of rust projects are MIT/Apache 2.0 so using those licenses is good for interoperability and upstreaming. MIT is known and trusted and had great success in projects like Godot.

ORIGINAL POST:

RedoxOS, uutils, zoxide, eza, ripgrep, fd, iced, orbtk,...

It really stands out considering that in FOSS software the GPL or at least the LGPL for toolkits is the most popular license

Most of the programs I listed are replacements for stuff we have in the Linux ecosystem, which are all licensed under the (L)GPL:

uutils, zoxide, eza, ripgrep, fd -> GNU coreutils (GPL)

iced, orbtk -> GTK, QT (LGPL)

RedoxOS -> Linux kernel, most desktop environments like GNOME, KDE etc. all licensed GPL as much as possible

Suppose I want my project to have as many contributors as possible. Generally do you think more people are inclined to contribute (upstream) if the code is permissive or copyleft or do you think it doesn't really matter?

A friend might let me install Linux on his secondary laptop he uses for university. He's not a tinkerer and wants something that just works.

Linux Mint is known for being very user-friendly and stable. Also easy to get help online.

However, in my opinion Mint seems rather outdated, both with its Windows-like workflow, default icons and look and also Xorg. When I tried it I had some screen stuttering I couldn't resolve, probably due to Xorg.

Instead, Fedora with GNOME is very elegant and always uses the newest technologies. It feels and looks actually nice and not outdated. But I'd have to install media codecs via terminal first which suggests that Fedora is for experienced users. Also university wifi eduroam doesn't work on Fedora for me because legacy TLS connection is not supported in Fedora (at least I couldn't get it to work). I'm at a different uni than him tho, so it might work there. In general, less help on the web for Fedora than Mint.

What do you think? (Btw, KDE is too convoluted in my opinion. Manjaro too, it breaks too often. I will not consider it.)

EDIT: From what I've gathered so far, I should probably install Mint. He can try Fedora with a live usb or on my laptop. If he prefers that then I can warn him that this may be less stable and ask what he wants.

I've only tried Ubuntu-based Mint, but LMDE is more future-proof so it will probably be that.

Today qBittorrent launched v4.6.0 which should support experimental i2p mode. I downloaded this version as a Flatpak from Flathub, but at Settings -> Connection there is no option for i2p mode. Only to set up a proxy, but SAM is not available as a proxy method which i2p uses. I also checked with the command "flatpak run org.qbittorrent.qBittorrent --version" that I'm indeed on the right version.

Do you have any ideas or similar issues?

Reading Antifragile by Nassim Taleb was eye-opening for me. I turn to the concepts of the book whenever I feel unsure about a decision or opinion.