3 ms·
The FSF can explain it better than I can. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html https://www.gnu.org/li
by arminiusreturns 8y ago
The FSF can explain it better than I can.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html
- paulddraper 8y ago> It drives me nuts how much people talk about OSS when they need to at least mention the difference between FOSS and OSS. Maybe because like you they find it hard to explain? According to your linked resources, it appears that everything except the Common Clause is FOSS. So, basically everything I've ever seen is FOSS.
- orangeshark 8y ago> According to your linked resources, it appears that everything except the Common Clause is FOSS. > So, basically everything I've ever seen is FOSS. Correct. Free Software just puts more attention to the freedom part of software. GNU has a nice diagram and some category definitions for software at https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html
- arminiusreturns 8y agoThat's a little bit of a cheap shot, I just wanted to give you a good resource for digging into licenses. Due to bsd and MIT allowing tivoization, those are the two non-foss licenses in that list in my opinion. I try to always use gplv3 when I can, but apache 2+ is acceptable to me.