Determining breaking API changes is the whole point of tests.

Private repositories have been free for… 10 years?

I told you it had been a long time!

It looks like private repos started being free in 2019.

https://github.blog/news-insights/product-news/new-year-new-...

I don’t think a company marketing a product/feature is an indicator that it’s bad.

As a paid/commercial OSS maintainer, I haven't seen this from the public either. People occasionally submit low-effort PRs or issues, probably from Claude or ChatGPT or whatever, but I don't feel to bothered dealing with them. Of course, I'm fortunate enough to be paid for this.

I think it's just an unfortunate fact now in 2025 that if you look after a text box online, you're going to have to deal with AI sludge in one way or another. If you don't want to do that, close the text box.

> you just SSH in to a box, patch it

Oh god. I can’t imagine how I could build reliably software if this is what I was doing. How do you know what “patches” are needed to run your software?

A staging server?

Why would it not be an animation?

It’s a pretty basic animation.

OP never talked about fault. They made an original decision, and now they've changed their mind. I don't see what the big deal is.

I don't think Guy really cares. They made their project, and they want the source to be available, and so chose a license that allows for that.

> It will be harder to monetize MIT licensed projects, because any competitor can just grab and run.

Importantly - any competitor can grab it and modify it to make it easier for them to run at scale and keep those changes closed-source.

ActivityPub is basically just less simple RSS.

and track follows.