- cross-posted to:
- techtakes@awful.systems
- cross-posted to:
- techtakes@awful.systems
Today we’re announcing that OpenAI will acquire Astral, bringing powerful open source developer tools into our Codex ecosystem.
Astral has built some of the most widely used open source Python tools, helping developers move faster with modern tooling like uv, Ruff, and ty. These tools power millions of developer workflows and have become part of the foundation of modern Python development. As part of our developer-first philosophy, after closing OpenAI plans to support Astral’s open source products. By bringing Astral’s tooling and engineering expertise to OpenAI, we will accelerate our work on Codex and expand what AI can do across the software development lifecycle.
The tools are open source. Someone needs to fork them before it’s too late.
the current versions will still be open source, you will always be able to fork them
But with slop in them
It’s version controlled.
They’ve already been using Claude for at least the last few months; you’ll find a
CLAUDE.mdfile and related settings in the uv repo if you lookGood luck - uv is under a MIT license, so every fork is just a free buffet for openai to incorporate into their enshittified version of uv. There is a reason the GPL exists and many people will learn this the hard way …
Your truust in the Law is admirable. OpenAI does not care at all about laws. They do what they want and have an army of lawyers to fight anyone who says differently. Just look at copyright laws.
This is why I am saying do it now. Better safe than sorry.
But, since all l am getting is abuse… I’m out! Y’all have the say you deserve.
The world does not consist entirely of the US.
While I agree that openai can buy enough “law” in the US to do what it wants, the license is important in other jurisdictions and can be enforced.
alll I see is abuse? I see only one comment under yours (and its pretty reasonalbe from brummbaer) but maybe all the rest are folks I have blocked.
Not here…
uv is under an MIT license, so every fork is free to relicense themselves as GPL and prevent openai’s gobblies.
Do you have more on that?
I’m not sure you can relicense the MIT code under GPL if you are not the author or it doesn’t say so in the MIT license, that relicensing is permitted.
The MIT is what’s called a permissive license.
That’s the entirety of the text. You can do pretty much anything as long as you make sure the first line is still visible somewhere (and if you’re not incorporating/relicensing it into GPL, you have to include the MIT license text as well; I’m less sure about how this parenthetical works but I do know an MIT project relicensed to GPL needs not include the MIT text), which in GPL it is.
https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#%3A~%3Atext=Expat)-,This%20is%20a%20lax%2C%20permissive%20non%2Dcopyleft%20free%20software%20license%2C%20compatible%20with%20the%20GNU%20GPL.,-Some
Thanks for the info.
So you can relicense MIT to GPL without the MiT parts staying MIT?
yes, you’re creating a derivative work that is entirely GPL. note that this doesn’t stop anyone from consulting the original since FOSS licenses do not have revocation. if they use none of the GPL derivative work they can still only abide by MIT. however, your changes would only exist in the GPL work, and they must be used with GPL.
Thanks for the clarification. I always thought that the GPL parts are also MIT then.
Too late for what exactly? Describe in actual detail.
You said it yourself, it’s open source so why are you running from it? The code is and will continue to be there in the open.
OpenAI can change the license at any time. Who’s going to stop them?
It can also be forked at any time from the commit prior.
Nope, they can retroactively change it
Commit history literally exists, you can go back to the commit prior to changing the license and fork it. Do you understand git in the slightest?