4 ms·

Interesting. I’m now curious how multi[1] compares to Fluid[2]. I haven’t used it in a while, but that app used to be present on all my installs. Can’t rememb

Interesting. I’m now curious how multi[1] compares to Fluid[2]. I haven’t used it in a while, but that app used to be present on all my installs. Can’t remember what happened that I stopped using it. [1] - https://github.com/kofigumbs/multi https://github.com/kofigumbs/multi [2] - https://www.fluidapp.com/ https://www.fluidapp.com/

sneak 6y ago
Multi is open source, free-as-in-freedom software. Fluid was proprietary commercial software (and the author was also a real jerk).
- rcarmo 6y ago
  Multi is open source software (GPLv3), but it is also paid software ($15).
  - sneak 6y ago
    If it's really GPLv3, then that would be called "donationware", as free-as-in-freedom software is also free-as-in-beer, as the author acknowledges in the README. The license seems ambiguous though because there's no LICENSE file in the repo and the website has copy about requiring a paid license to use the software; the only place GPLv3 is mentioned is in the README. I opened an issue requesting clarification. https://github.com/kofigumbs/multi/issues/37 https://github.com/kofigumbs/multi/issues/37
    - nottorp 6y ago
      Actually the GPL never says you cannot sell your software. It just says you have to provide source with it and you cannot prevent others from redistributing the source. Edit: no idea what the software mentioned above does, just correcting a common misconception.
    - hkgumbs 6y ago
      Author here—my understanding of the GPL matches that in the sibling comment. "GPL never says you cannot sell your software. It just says you have to provide source with it and you cannot prevent others from redistributing the source." If I'm incorrectly co-opting some open source nomenclature, I'd love if someone could let me know. As I said in the issue linked above, I do need to update the purchase website to bring that language more inline with what's on GitHub.
      - mthoms 6y ago
        I didn't read your specific wording but generally - using GPL in this fashion is perfectly fine and quite common.
    - mthoms 6y ago
      Many shops that "sell" GPL software (ie. the massive WordPress plugin and theme ecosystem) are actually selling support, convenient, secure(ish) updates, and good karma. It's perfectly legit. You can find the sources for these items elsewhere on the web but the hassle and security implications just aren't worth it.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  What did the author of Fluid do?
- mthoms 6y ago
  Why do you say he's a jerk? I had some positive interactions with the author. He went out of his way to explain how to do something that wasn't officially supported (how to include my own user scripts). Nothing major. But way better support than I ever expected for a $5(!) desktop app.

sneak 6y ago

Multi is open source, free-as-in-freedom software. Fluid was proprietary commercial software (and the author was also a real jerk).

rcarmo 6y ago
Multi is open source software (GPLv3), but it is also paid software ($15).
- sneak 6y ago
  If it's really GPLv3, then that would be called "donationware", as free-as-in-freedom software is also free-as-in-beer, as the author acknowledges in the README. The license seems ambiguous though because there's no LICENSE file in the repo and the website has copy about requiring a paid license to use the software; the only place GPLv3 is mentioned is in the README. I opened an issue requesting clarification. https://github.com/kofigumbs/multi/issues/37 https://github.com/kofigumbs/multi/issues/37
  - nottorp 6y ago
    Actually the GPL never says you cannot sell your software. It just says you have to provide source with it and you cannot prevent others from redistributing the source. Edit: no idea what the software mentioned above does, just correcting a common misconception.
  - hkgumbs 6y ago
    Author here—my understanding of the GPL matches that in the sibling comment. "GPL never says you cannot sell your software. It just says you have to provide source with it and you cannot prevent others from redistributing the source." If I'm incorrectly co-opting some open source nomenclature, I'd love if someone could let me know. As I said in the issue linked above, I do need to update the purchase website to bring that language more inline with what's on GitHub.
    - mthoms 6y ago
      I didn't read your specific wording but generally - using GPL in this fashion is perfectly fine and quite common.
  - mthoms 6y ago
    Many shops that "sell" GPL software (ie. the massive WordPress plugin and theme ecosystem) are actually selling support, convenient, secure(ish) updates, and good karma. It's perfectly legit. You can find the sources for these items elsewhere on the web but the hassle and security implications just aren't worth it.
Wowfunhappy 6y ago
What did the author of Fluid do?
mthoms 6y ago
Why do you say he's a jerk? I had some positive interactions with the author. He went out of his way to explain how to do something that wasn't officially supported (how to include my own user scripts). Nothing major. But way better support than I ever expected for a $5(!) desktop app.