HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
google
trace-viewer
OPEN SOURCE2014–2015
google / trace-viewer · Archived

trace-viewer

Discover this repository through its Hacker News conversations.

5Distinct people
5Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
488GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A public description has not been verified.

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 12:54:37 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month5 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2014-10-14 20:01:57 UTC to 2015-07-08 15:32:38 UTC.

012014-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsOct 20142014-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsFeb 20152015-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2015-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2015-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2015-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsJul 2015

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Oct 20142014-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-11-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Nov 20142014-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 20142014-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20152015-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20152015-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-04-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Apr 20152015-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-05-01 00:00:00 UTC101
May 20152015-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-06-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Jun 20152015-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20152015-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-08-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

5 sources
I agree, and that's what I was saying in the second paragraph (I've edited it a bit to try to make that clearer). This is definitely an improvement from that original language. But I don't see how the original license was somehow worse than the open source projects that use the MIT or BSD licenses without any patent license, thus potentially allowing the patent owner to use patents against you offensively or defensively. (As far as I know, it is still unresolved whether the MIT or BSD licenses include an implied grant of patent rights, but at the very least there would be serious legal uncertainty.) For one example, see the license on this Google project: https://github.com/google/trace-viewer/blob/master/LICENSE. No mention of patent rights, and unless you could successfully argue that there was an implied license, Google could sue a use
Read the rest
r for patent infringement for using this software (not that Google has ever used patents offensively, to my knowledge). So it confused me to see a Google employee complaining in the other thread that they weren't allowed to use Facebook open source software due to the limited patent grant. I'd be really interested to know more about this policy.
In Updating Our Open Source Patent Grant

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.