Programming

17381 readers

473 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

109

HashiCorp changes license from Mozilla Public License 2.0 to Business Source License 1.1 on their products (www.hashicorp.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

Its still open source. You can still view the source code. That’s what open source is.

"Open Source" does not, and has never only meant, "you can view the source code". This is the Open Source Definition: https://opensource.org/osd/

Relevant excerpt:

No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor

The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.

The Open Source Definition is very specific, and this license does not meet it. This license is, as it calls itself, "source-available".

If the OSI had obtained that trademark in 1999 on "Open Source", it would be abundantly clear what software really is and is not open source https://opensource.org/pressreleases/certified-open-source.php/