2 ms·
Although we’ve come to refer to the BSL as eventually open-source since it converts to an OSI-approved license at the conversion date, due to the grant restrict
by xyzzyz 7y ago
Although we’ve come to refer to the BSL as eventually open-source since it converts to an OSI-approved license at the conversion date, due to the grant restriction, it is formally not an open-source license.
Yes, they don't call it that. Seems like the actual open source advocates will hector them before they even start.
- rectang 7y agoWrong. They call it an "OSS" license: > It’s a brave new world, but we believe this licensing change will best ensure the future of Sentry and that protections-oriented OSS licenses like the BSL will become increasingly common as time goes on.
- Aeolun 7y agoProbably because the source is still open. This whole discussion strongly reminds me that open-source and free software are not the same.
- rectang 7y agoThis sort of confusion is exactly why this battle is worth fighting. The proper term for licenses like the BSL is "source available". You can view the source, but you cannot use it under terms which conform to the Open Source Definition.
- BYK 7y agoThis now has been rectified. Apologies for the misrepresentation, wasn't intentional.