3 ms·

What you're trying to say is "I don't like the way it's run". Okay, fine. That doesn't make it "not open source". I have projects where I don't accept patches.

What you're trying to say is "I don't like the way it's run". Okay, fine. That doesn't make it "not open source". I have projects where I don't accept patches. "It works for me" and I just don't feel like reviewing patches. Is that not "open source" in spite of being MIT licenced? "I can do with the code what I want" is the entire and only point of Open Source and Free Software, something Stallman and many others have been pretty clear about over the years.

trasz 4y ago
>"I can do with the code what I want" is the entire and only point of Open Source This is not true at all, as evidenced by http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral.... You are mistaking Open Source for public domain.