Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

The author's explicit wishes, in no uncertain terms, are that anyone can "do what the fuck they want to with it" [0][1]. I think when he did this, he gave up (willingly, and with a bit of profanity) the right to have any say at all about whether, how or by whom it was published.

[0]http://www.wtfpl.net/

[1]https://github.com/azer/left-pad/blob/master/package.json#L2...




The author also said "if you volunteer to take ownership of any module in my Github, I’ll happily transfer the ownership" in the blog post.


Which is a nice gesture, but since the wtfpl seems to give up any pretense of ownership on the part of the author, it's also irrelevant. Anyone can do what they want with it. If he wanted to keep tighter control of the code he should have published under a more restrictive license.

And, if he wanted people to take the time to be polite and contact him through his github account, maybe he shouldn't have wrecked so many people's builds.


The "ownership" I assume is referring to ownership on npm. I was just saying that, based on that excerpt from the blog post, it sounds like the author didn't actually want to keep tighter control of the code, and that re-publishing the code doesn't really go against the author's wishes.


I'm pretty sure the ownership he's referring to is the github repo. Since he unpublished from npm, he has no control over those names.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: