145
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] veniasilente@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago

Now that would be a horror story. Then again, it's one of the reasons why I'm asking. Rust fame is just too coincidental with a number of things to not be suspicious. There was a whole thing in C++ (dunno if it's still ongoing) about the "memory safety" meme, as well.

[-] eutampieri@feddit.it 4 points 4 days ago

Since you seem to be in good faith: no, you’re wrong. Using a language cannot force you into adopting a licence, because automatically everything you produce will be all rights reserved unless otherwise specified. It’s then up to the developer to choose a license.

Rust doesn’t even populate the license metadata in your manifest, it’s up to you.

I think MIT dominance came about thanks to GitHub’s choose a license.

[-] vas@lemmy.ml 7 points 5 days ago

I feel ya. To me, it's really sad that some new projects now use licenses that are really good for businesses but do not even protect the projects themselves. I'd rather live in a world where GPL share would increase. (Instead, GPL grows, but its share is diminishing.) All my projects so far are GPL/AGPL.

At the same time, Rust being picked for Linux has really nothing to do with the license. It's just what you said - a coincidence. The actual choice is made because of the language itself. It's a great language BTW.

[-] veniasilente@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago

Eh, I've heard "foo is a great language" far too many times before, and we always end up seeing the disaster. Sometimes I miss C with POSIX.

this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2026
145 points (100.0% liked)

Rust

8141 readers
7 users here now

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

!performance@programming.dev

Credits

  • The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS