Licenses are not important at all, IP should be dismissed as lunacy, information is not property by default. If you want the code to be maintainable and have decent chances at adoption and evolve, you should have it open source. I’m not going to respect “copyleft” licenses, or restrictions.
The only good thing about licenses is that it can keep your competitors scared from using it, but otherwise I don’t think anyone should be afraid of words. If anything, they just clutter repos and source so please remove it if you can.
22 Likes
Can only agree that licensing is needed only for a very limited amount of time.
I think when you are going with full steam ahead, eg. have enabled decentralization for the better part of the network you already reached point where disadvantages overweight the advantages.
24 Likes
一年收一次费，先走五年规划，区块链在慢慢变大，一开始放的太开，容易扯着淡
20 Likes
hello! My name Kirill!
15 Likes
Pitching in at Eli’s request 
Polynya’s thoughts resonate with mine. I would advocate for StarkNet core infrastructure (including the prover and Cairo toolchain) to be open-sourced under Apache 2.0. The following may be the best outcome I could hope for:
- StarkWare honours its commitment to license StarkNet as described here.
- Soon after StarkNet is handed to the community Polynya and other respected community members co-author SNIP-1 (StarkNet Improvement Proposal 1) to license all StarkNet core infrastructure under Apache 2.0.
- StarkNet community governance votes in favour of SNIP-1.
- The acceptance of SNIP-1 marks a cultural rebirth for StarkNet. SNIP-1 serves as a Schelling point enshrining values consistent with StarkNet being a true permissionless public good.
23 Likes
As StarkNet Governance is finally coming online, this is an opportune time to echo Justin’s thoughts above and I hope to see delegates propose SNIP-1 to license all StarkNet infrastructure under Apache 2.0. This is my minimum personal expectation from StarkNet Governance.
18 Likes