|
|
|
|
|
|
by DyslexicAtheist
2153 days ago
|
|
|
it's for me not a show-stopper but I can see it will needlessly antagonize people. Why not just say immediately "it is a non-commercial license that allows you to look at the source code BUT [in fat bold font] NOT FOSS" - which takes the air out of anyone who may get triggered. ... This are just weasel words: > "Sure, other companies might have bigger brands and bigger sales budgets, but this is open-source. You can vet the code, in the open, and so can anyone. You know there's nothing hidden inside. Plus, future updates have all the benefit of open-source software." |
|
|
This part is particularly strange, because a major benefit of open source software is other people can fork and keep the project alive if the company goes out of business or loses interest. I myself have rescued abandoned projects before and just released a new version for one today. This benefit is clearly missing for this product, at least I can't see any way to revive it to keep commercial use alive without a license change.