• @Jinna@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    82 months ago

    Ignoring the subject matter, that’s a terrible LLM slop article. Odd phrasing and extra words like Zanonical all around. Just a wholly unreliable source for anything if they allow that on their platform.

  • RedSnt 👓♂️🖥️
    link
    fedilink
    English
    42 months ago

    In theory I think it’s a fine exercise rewriting tools like this. I’m not an expert on anything, least of all licenses, but going from GNU’s GPL-3 license to uutils MIT license is perhaps the most noteworthy:

    Unlike the GPL, the MIT license does not require that derivative works be open source. Developers can incorporate MIT-licensed code into their projects without being required to release the source code of their entire project.

    • username
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 months ago

      Can’t Mint just choose not to incorporate them? They did that with snaps

      • @ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 months ago

        Snap was just one side thing. Coreutils is, well, core. Diverging on that is like diverging on systemd: if Mint does that, they may as well split from Ubuntu completely, as the dependency hell with Ubuntu packages will be completely unmanageable.

        • username
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          That makes sense, thank you (I’m slow)