Post

> we decided that the codebase is not a derivative work that would require carrying forward the GPL license and have decided to release the code under the MIT instead. oh someone wants to get sued.

I don't even think git being licensed more permissively (eg, MPL2 or something) would be a bad thing! It would be a net positive for humanity probably. Just, like. Using AI to rewrite and relicense one of the single most-used pieces of GPLed software is actually a declaration of licensing war.

And git probably has contributors with standing to sue who might have the ideological motive to do so. Also, like. How are you not a derived work? What made you come to that conclusion? Or do you just really WANT to not be?

They did explain their rationale in the post and I think they're being honest (tl;dr gitoxide and libgit2 have longstanding issues around certain kinds of missing functionality that theu want to address and they make no claims this is ready for primetime), but that doesn't make it a good idea.

Also, gitbutler has BUSL style licensing IIRC. They're gonna get ripped to shreds.

there is already a rust port of git anyway lol, it's been around forever github.com/gitoxidelabs...