Why shouldn't I use the Mozilla Public License? It seems

>>58045710
So how does MPL work compared to BSD/MIT and GPL? Isn't that you only have to release the changes you make and the rest can be proprietary?

>>58045710
its not foss

>>58045794
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#MPL-2.0
It's GPL compatible.

>>58045731
From what I understand:

You can use MPL code in closed-source software so long as you include a way to get the source code of the MPL components.

Changes to MPL code must be made available under MPL.

It's like a simpler version of LGPL.

>>58045710
This is what GPL should be.

>>58046273
This

>>58045731
BSD is most permissive, it only requires you to redistribute the original code.
MPL forces you to release modifications to that code as well.
The GPL is the most strict, it infects any proprietary code you might have as well. LGPL is supposed to fix that, but there's a GPL-relicense hack that many people do where they relicense LGPL as GPL (because this is allowed).