• isthereanyseal@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      It is open source. But the license is not foss at the moment. They expresed their desire to make something that send revenue to creators

      • chebra@mstdn.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        @isthereanydeal therefore it’s not open source. See for something to be called “open source” it needs a bit more than just for the code to be readable. The only people who define open source as source readable are the people who don’t want to create open source software.

        • isthereanyseal@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          There’s a clear difference between open source and free open source software. It is open source but the licence is not “free”. Not entirely at least

          • chebra@mstdn.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            @isthereanydeal Nope. That distinction only appeared when big companies kinda became afraid of open source software, so they wanted to redefine the term, create some confusion, corrupt it…