Proprietary software doesn't need any revival, because it never went away.
The irony is that proprietary browser based software happens to run on top of FOSS libraries and languages, which most companies hardly contribute anything back.
The irony is that proprietary browser based software happens to run on top of FOSS libraries and languages, which most companies hardly contribute anything back.
True, though we have reached a point where one could be really comfortable without proprietary software. I certainly am. It's just with an increasingly "appified" web that proprietary software makes again inroads on otherwise free systems.
Agreed. I extremely comfortable with my fully free system, and the only risk I have each day (which I've mitigated) for running non-free software is the constant barrage that others attempt to force upon me using my web browser---free browsers gladly download and execute non-free software by default.
I gave a talk about this and the issues of package management and code signing at LP2016: https://media.libreplanet.org/u/libreplanet/collection/resto...
Seriously, there's no shared libraries in compiled monolithic WebAssembly, is there? I think[1] that means included GPL code will require exposure of the source.
Maybe if we're lucky some best practice will emerge that the source is often available as a sourcemap so companies don't have to worry about being sued for infringing the GPL. It sure would be nice to finally see an outcome of companies erring on the side of (legal) caution that's better for consumers.
1: Think because everybody seems to like to argue the specifics of this point.
In any case most companies are busy moving away from anything GPL related.
GCC just got kicked out of Android and all Linux alternatives for IoT are using MIT like licenses.
Always cracks me up how many people think the GPL means "I get everything I want, exactly how I want it".
What did I say that made you think that? I said the GPL requires exposure of the source, and maybe some best practices could emerge if we're lucky that might amount to it being easily available.
> Always cracks me up how many people think the GPL means "I get everything I want, exactly how I want it".
Interesting, as it always cracks me up when people decide to interpret statements in contorted, narrow ways just so they align with a pet peeve and they have something to rail against.
That said many companies do contribute back and in the case of the web quite a few big libraries and frameworks were released open by private companies.