Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by kristianpaul 1809 days ago
How this could be named open source but actually be licensed under a creative commons non comercial license (BY-NC-SA 4.0)

https://doc.kerberos.io/opensource/license/
3 comments
remram 1809 days ago
Seems like v3 is MIT (but not yet released): https://github.com/kerberos-io/opensource/blob/master/LICENS...
link
fooblat 1809 days ago
It does seem like an odd choice given that Creative Commons specifically recommends against it[0]. That alone would make me unlikely to use this project.

0. https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-apply-a-creative-comm...

link
ghastmaster 1808 days ago
"Open Source" means the source code is accessible, usually to the entire public. "Closed Source" means the source code is not accessible.

Whether the source is open or not does not limit what type of license that can be applied to it. For example, I can write a program and not release it to any other soul and give it an MIT license. Conversely I could publish code on github available to the public and apply a very strict license.

link