Hacker News Reader

WT has been around for years. It's interesting from a technology standpoint, but before you get too excited, TAL at their license[1].

Gui toolkits often have exceptions so that their license doesn't infect the application using it. Not wt. They have only two options, gpl and commercial.

[1] https://github.com/emweb/wt/blob/master/doc/licenses.md

View on HN

For web development, GPL is not an issue for commercial applications - you are not distributing binaries to the end-user.

Wt is a frontend framework with some JavaScript components, so you are actually redistributing it.

The font-end part is already open source anyway.

In the case of Wt, the JavaScript would not be considered the source code.

Yeah this is a big gray area, because in this case the javascript is the build artifact. It's the "compiled" version on the code.

I'd love to hear a lawyer weigh in on this.

It's not a grey area at all. The GPL clearly defines source code, and Javascript build artifacts ain't it.

Sort of, but the question is whether you're producing and distributing a derived work, and I'd say that is the case, even if the parts you're distributing aren't the "important" ones.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com