• unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The main dev made the last commit, so they dont have the right to make another commit, until they arent the last person to make a commit anymore (until someone else has made a commit). This makes sure that there are at least 2 people making commits but hopefully much more.

    In other words, making a commit revokes your right to do so until someone else makes a commit.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      88
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Am I just bad at reading? It says the right to make changes is granted to everyone one Earth. That would include the last person to make a commit as well, assuming they’re a citizen of Earth. I’m sure what you’re saying is what it’s supposed to say, but it isn’t actually what it says.

      • mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        All rights reserved by…, except the right to commit to this repository.

        Being a legal license it requires much more rigorous and clear statement

        • stankmut@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          47
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          You can’t just ignore the second part of that sentence which gives the right to make commits to all citizens of earth. That would include the person who wrote the last commit.

            • MartianSands@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              24
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I’m pretty sure it means exactly what it says, but you lot are all misreading it.

              I interpret it as “all rights, except the right to commit, are reserved” (which doesn’t mean you surrender the right to commit, but rather that it’s the only right you aren’t depriving everyone else of)

              • dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                And I’m pretty sure that the name “hot potato license” and the comment above the license are very strong indicators for this not being the case. The license is meant to mimic a game of hot potato where you get the code for a short moment (one commit) and have to throw it to someone else. Sure, the analogy doesn’t quite work because you can’t decide who has to make the next commit but it would make even less sense if you were able to keep control over the code and add more and more commits. That would defeat the whole point of naming it “hot potato license”.

          • lugal
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Are you doxing OOP right now??? How do you know they life on earth?

          • mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Thats why I said it needs to be more rigorous. The license probably meant Everyone in the earth except the last person who commited to it

      • mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        All rights reserved by…, except the right to commit to this repository.

        Being a legal license it requires much more rigorous and clear statement

    • zewm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      The fact that you have 38 upvotes with such an incorrect statement is mind boggling.

      This is how politics works I supposed. Write something that sounds plausible but is completely incorrect, inaccurate or completely fabricated and stupid people applaud and follow.

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Its ok to be unable to read, but dont make that other peoples problem.

        https://github.com/ErikMcClure/bad-licenses/blob/master/hot-potato-license

        This is copied from V2 but same thing:

        All rights reserved by the last person to commit a change to this repository,

        No explanation needed

        except for the right to commit changes to this repository,

        Also no explanation needed

        which is hereby granted to all inhabitants of the Milky Way Galaxy for the purpose of committing changes to this repository.

        This refers to the previous section meaning everyone can make commits to the repository except for the person excluded by that same section

        • brisk@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          A right not being reserved does not mean it is waived, only that it is not exclusive. The last person to commit still has the right to commit, as does everyone else.