There is a lack of payment options.

This is the most important issue for me. I am happy to send a couple of bucks to a couple of services via bank transfer. It doesn’t cost anything. Paying >3% to paypal or stripe is just nuts. I won’t do that.

Edit: I would send 50 cents to many projects but I’d have to pay huge fees on that, so I don’t.

This is patrick

That is a good question to which I have to direct answer I guess.

arte is a media producer and server at the same time. Peertube provides the fundament for serving videos. To me it sounds like there should be a big overlap.

arte already has build their system but let’s think big and long term, not only one year ahead. Arte could use a peertube backend (with extra steps) and focus on what they do best, producing content. By adjust peertube to their needs, other broadcasters could use it as well and many would profit. The broadcasters could easily share selected media with others, making the services interconnected. The user wouldn’t need many accounts for France Télévisions, ARD and others. The user wouldn’t need 5 apps for the same type of media.

Collab with arte would be great?

Markdown does a great job for me

You don’5lt have to build it yourself. You can also download from the release page https://framagit.org/framasoft/peertube/mobile-application/-/releases

(I don’t know about the restriction)

I’d go for markdown (html, js) but if I had to choose between tex and typst, I’d get rid of tex as much as possible

https://typst.app/universe/package/touying/

https://typst.app/universe/package/slydst/

https://github.com/polylux-typ/polylux

Typst. Quarto. Xaringan. There’s lots of good tools.

Why?

It does not fork anything. Right now, it uses already existing fedora / oci images.

It says

Codeberg is a non-profit, community-led effort that provides Git hosting and other services for free and open source projects.

Codeberg?

You might be interested in reproducible-builds.org or f-droid.org/en/docs/Reproducible_Builds

Visibility :/

I am no dev of rust.

My guess:

• they didn’t want to scare anyone.
• They really think that MIT is free and that anyone shall do with it whatever they like. They are not afraid that someone takes the rust code base and produces a proprietary fork and make money from it.

You are allowed to license your code change under gpl, you do not have to use MIT just because the package author uses MIT. You can use GPL.

You can also use MIT or no license at all. it does not force you to use MIT

You could say that, yes.

It makes sense to suggest MIT license for a MIT project

MIT is better than proprietary. MIT does not force you to not make your project free.

It’s kind of the default in the docs

https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/manifest.html?highlight=License#the-license-and-license-file-fields

SPDX license expressions support AND and OR operators to combine multiple licenses.1

  [package]
   # ...
  license = "MIT OR Apache-2.0"

Using OR indicates the user may choose either license. Using AND indicates the user must comply with both licenses simultaneously. The WITH operator indicates a license with a special exception. Some examples:

MIT OR Apache-2.0
LGPL-2.1-only AND MIT AND BSD-2-Clause
GPL-2.0-or-later WITH Bison-exception-2.2

When I started out (I don’t write Rust but other languages), in my first years, I liked gpl and after a couple of years I got to know MIT and I started using that because I thought it is “more free”. I wasn’t aware of the consequences immediately. Once I read the GNU philosophy and started reading more about free software, I started using gplv3 again

I was curious. Not mocking you :)

I could imagine living in a valley, or an alpine hut.

What’s a/your use case?