You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Now that Swift is expanding beyond its Apple-focused roots, I think that calling out a Swift package for using variants of the General Public License (GPL) with a scary orange exclamation point is no longer warranted. The SPI FAQ's warning that these licenses "may present a legal risk" does not apply to the platforms where the Swift community has been struggling to make inroads.
For example, the HTML generation package like HyperSwift, whose primary application will be on servers (where GPL-style licenses are common), is called out as being "problematic". Linux and Android are themselves GPL, so clearly running GPL-licensed code on these platforms does not present any "legal risk".
I have dozens of Swift packages that use the LGPL, but I can't list any of them on SPI because it looks like they are somehow dangerous. Other package indices like swiftinit.org have no such license bias.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Now that Swift is expanding beyond its Apple-focused roots, I think that calling out a Swift package for using variants of the General Public License (GPL) with a scary orange exclamation point is no longer warranted. The SPI FAQ's warning that these licenses "may present a legal risk" does not apply to the platforms where the Swift community has been struggling to make inroads.
For example, the HTML generation package like HyperSwift, whose primary application will be on servers (where GPL-style licenses are common), is called out as being "problematic". Linux and Android are themselves GPL, so clearly running GPL-licensed code on these platforms does not present any "legal risk".
I have dozens of Swift packages that use the LGPL, but I can't list any of them on SPI because it looks like they are somehow dangerous. Other package indices like swiftinit.org have no such license bias.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions