▲ 109 ▼ HashiCorp changes license from Mozilla Public License 2.0 to Business Source License 1.1 on their products (www.hashicorp.com) submitted 3 years ago* by starman@programming.dev to c/programming@programming.dev 34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] falsem@kbin.social -1 points 3 years ago (1 child) You're conflating FOSS and open source. This is open source just not FOSS anymore permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) This is plainly incorrect, please see the other responses. FOSS stands for "free and open source software", but they functionally mean the same thing. So what you're saying is: This is open source just not open source anymore permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] falsem@kbin.social 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) You're cherry picking a definition to support your agenda. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 years ago So your claim is that the open source definition by the Open Source Initiative which is battle tested and widely used by distributions, major git hosts and legal enitities is a cherry-picked definition? Sounds like you're cherry-picking your definition to hide that you simply have no idea :) permalink fedilink source parent [–] hypelightfly@kbin.social 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) This is plainly incorrect but I won't bother saying why either. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 years ago I don't get what you're trying to say here. All terms used have a clear definition and other comments pointed that out already. The definition on open source is very clear. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) This is plainly incorrect, please see the other responses. FOSS stands for "free and open source software", but they functionally mean the same thing. So what you're saying is: This is open source just not open source anymore permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] falsem@kbin.social 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) You're cherry picking a definition to support your agenda. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 years ago So your claim is that the open source definition by the Open Source Initiative which is battle tested and widely used by distributions, major git hosts and legal enitities is a cherry-picked definition? Sounds like you're cherry-picking your definition to hide that you simply have no idea :) permalink fedilink source parent [–] hypelightfly@kbin.social 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) This is plainly incorrect but I won't bother saying why either. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 years ago I don't get what you're trying to say here. All terms used have a clear definition and other comments pointed that out already. The definition on open source is very clear. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] falsem@kbin.social 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) You're cherry picking a definition to support your agenda. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 years ago So your claim is that the open source definition by the Open Source Initiative which is battle tested and widely used by distributions, major git hosts and legal enitities is a cherry-picked definition? Sounds like you're cherry-picking your definition to hide that you simply have no idea :) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 years ago So your claim is that the open source definition by the Open Source Initiative which is battle tested and widely used by distributions, major git hosts and legal enitities is a cherry-picked definition? Sounds like you're cherry-picking your definition to hide that you simply have no idea :) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hypelightfly@kbin.social 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) This is plainly incorrect but I won't bother saying why either. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 years ago I don't get what you're trying to say here. All terms used have a clear definition and other comments pointed that out already. The definition on open source is very clear. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 years ago I don't get what you're trying to say here. All terms used have a clear definition and other comments pointed that out already. The definition on open source is very clear. permalink fedilink source parent