> "yet another project pulling on open source resources"
Erm, yeah. Isn't that the point of making something open source with a permissive license? So that other people are able to use it in their own projects?
Agreed - I feel like 15 or 20 years ago, GPL was a well-known license so that's just what people went with, without understanding all of the implications.
Legally for sure. But from an ecosystem perspective, it's reasonable to be concerned about people whose relationships to a commons is essentially extractive. When I use open source in commercial offerings, I see it as both morally appropriate and good business to contribute back in one way or another.
From my perspective as an open-source consumer, that doesn't matter much. The license tells me what I can legally get away with. But what I care about pragmatically is whether that project will keep existing and improving such that it will meet my needs down the road. And what I care about morally is maintaining positive-sum relationships with my community and society.
Erm, yeah. Isn't that the point of making something open source with a permissive license? So that other people are able to use it in their own projects?