this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2024
73 points (96.2% liked)

Opensource

1142 readers
397 users here now

A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!

CreditsIcon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I wonder if they perhaps would be better off doing something to what Microsoft did with vscode: put the core under an open source license, then create a new product that integrates it under a restricted license with all Microsoft branding and specifics and release that as a product. That way the original Microsoft content is not subject to the open source and the true open source definition can be applied to what is the most important, the core. It wouldn't require any changes to the open source definition for example. It doesn't fix all issues raised, but may be a bit of a middle ground? Thoughts?

[–] young_broccoli@fedia.io 13 points 3 months ago

Or just call it something other than "open source", like "source available" or something.