> If you close those, you are basically closed-source with an option to peak at the code. Oh no. Closed-source with an option to peak the code does exist. Thi

> If you close those, you are basically closed-source with an option to peak at the code. Oh no. Closed-source with an option to peak the code does exist. This is not it. Because it is licensed GPL. Which means you have the option to copy the code into your own project. In whole, or just looking at particular parts that are useful. You have the option to fork it and do whatever you want to it. If you got some people together that thought "gee, we like this, but we wish it took PR requests", you are legally allowed to copy the code into a different project (ie fork it) that takes PR requests, and become the maintainers of that project. This is *HUGE*. You can't do that with closed source even if they let you see the code. There is a very big difference between "closed source that lets you see the code" (which does exist, but this isn't it) and "open source". And it's not whether they take PR's -- closed source can take PR's too. The a proprietary company will let you volunteer your time to submit improvements to their code does not make it open source. It's about who (if anyone) controls the code and can decide who is allowed to use it or not, not just see it.It's about the license. It is important that we as developers and decision-makers about what code to use understand this difference.