The licence terms / variation on MIT is interesting - unless this file is part of some standard I'm unaware of I'd expect it still shows as plain MIT for most automated SBOM collection/licence checks which feels problematic.
Ouch, why even involve the MIT license if you're gonna do custom terms anyways? Just put "Copyright me" and be done with it instead of ending up with some weird half and half solution. Net effect ends up the same anyways.
rsyring 12 hours ago [-]
Yeah, that kills adoption by most people I'd imagine. Non-standard license terms are always a huge red flag IMO, regardless of actual license terms.
14 hours ago [-]
mre 13 hours ago [-]
We use httpmock [1] for lychee, and it works quite well. Haven't looked too closely at the differences yet.
Vile, wretched and despicable Rust proponents will censor and downplay this.
airstrike 5 hours ago [-]
Some Rust proponents, but certainly it's obvious not all of them, or not even a meaningful majority.
Which is to say this despicable act has absolutely no bearing on the language and its ecosystem, so bringing it up is irrelevant, and therefore those downplaying it are not necessarily in favor of the act.
I hope that logic is self-evident.
petcat 12 hours ago [-]
Rust + Axum + SQLx has been a total game-changer for me in terms of productivity developing web-based Postgres apps. I like the tooling and the libraries are great.
RegW 14 hours ago [-]
Feels like a Wiremock for Rust.
Rendered at 01:27:20 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
(https://github.com/rustrum/apate/blob/main/LICENSE-TERMS)
[1] https://docs.rs/httpmock/latest/httpmock/
https://youtube.com/watch?v=FIEwcTKUFCA
Vile, wretched and despicable Rust proponents will censor and downplay this.
Which is to say this despicable act has absolutely no bearing on the language and its ecosystem, so bringing it up is irrelevant, and therefore those downplaying it are not necessarily in favor of the act.
I hope that logic is self-evident.