From 9913f6705d3e395e0555697d75ee0a9ad5aac525 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Misha Kaletsky <15040698+mmkal@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2023 07:06:30 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] MIT=good, GPLv3=meh, not the other way around
Hi - I came across this project from the oxc readme and it looks interesting. However I noticed that in the feature comparison table, it lists the GPLv3 license as "good" where eslint's and Rome's MIT licenses as "meh". While GPLv3 might protect _this_ project better, there's no way GPLv3 is better from the point of view of someone who is considering using it or modifying it. GPLv3 is much more restrictive and many companies don't even allow usage of GPLv3 licensed software without explicit approval. So, I'm opening this PR to make this less misleading for anyone not familiar with those licenses.
---
website/public/index.ejs.html | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/website/public/index.ejs.html b/website/public/index.ejs.html
index 18737a26c8..935bd13d14 100755
--- a/website/public/index.ejs.html
+++ b/website/public/index.ejs.html
@@ -605,11 +605,11 @@ Features
| license |
- free
GPLv3 |
- open source
MIT |
- open source
MIT |
- open source
MIT |
- open source
MIT |
+ free
GPLv3 |
+ open source
MIT |
+ open source
MIT |
+ open source
MIT |
+ open source
MIT |
| JSX |