Open Source
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
Most likely GPLv3 for the client app and AGPL for any server side component.
I would love to see a good comparison between all the different licenses
https://choosealicense.com/licenses/ covers the most popular at least
this website seems very biased to me as it is written by a Microsoft company.
- it uses overly complex legal mumbo jumbo to describe the copyleft licenses, while describing the non-copyleft ones in friendly terms "A short and simple permissive license with conditions only requiring..." making them more appealing somehow.
- it mentions a permission to PATENT things, with all licenses. when software patents must be banned, and in practices only exist in some weird loophole in the EU. While FSF site reads as "GPLv3 also provides users with explicit patent protection from the program's contributors and redistributors. " (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/rms-why-gplv3.html )
- it propagates the meme that allowing ppl to make proprietary crap out of your software is "permissive". like if having the right to own slaves would give you... more freedom...?
- This page has existed long before GitHub was owned by Microsoft, so that's not really a meaningful claim
- My reading of the patent stuff is that the licenses that mention them disallow the authors from patenting the software, but I agree that that's not super clear from the page itself
- Permissive is the established term for such a license, I don't know what else you'd call it that isn't offensive
Very cool! Thank you!
A political answer here:
- if you want your code to be part of a movement for freedom, to be part of creating a "bubble of freedom" that will serve the world while protecting itself and its users, but fully serve only those whose interests are aligned with the objectives of freedom: go *GPL.
- if you don't give a fck, that you think code is not political and do it just for fun, go to a "business-friendly" (some call them "permissive" but i tend to see freedom to do business at somebody else's exprense rather "exploitative" than anything myself...), BSDMITetc.
It's incorrect to call BSD/MIT "not political". It allows proprietization and does not protect users and authors from tivoization, patents and trademarks.
I didnt write that "BSD/MIT is not political" as i agree with your statement. I said "if you think that code is not political", as it is a statement you often hear from ppl who don't want to think too much about license (or about anything else but code). I was describing a symptom, a state of mind (that make ppl opt for BSD and other "exploitative-free" licenses).
You can't go wrong with GPL_V2.
if u write ur program in Mandarin u wont need any license cuz no corporation will touch that
Are you saying there's no Chinese corporation? 🤔
none that programs in mandarin yet huehuehue