3 ms·
To be fair, after 3 years it reverts to the Apache License. I don't think there is much reason for a fork. It is like Ghostscript has always done. I can underst
by mpol 4y ago
To be fair, after 3 years it reverts to the Apache License. I don't think there is much reason for a fork. It is like Ghostscript has always done. I can understand the change might feel a bit sour, but wanting to drive them out of business is a bit much I think. Also, this software sounds like it is mostly used by big companies, they can pay up to keep this software going.
- JonChesterfield 4y agoOr the three year statement is to discourage a fork and in three years' time they'll reconsider that part and keep it closed.
- tkfu 4y agoThe reversion to Apache is part of the BSL license, including the specific timeline of the reversion. So although they could decide later on to change the license again (for example, making it completely proprietary), all of the code released under the BSL will eventually become open source.
- josephcsible 4y ago> It is like Ghostscript has always done. No it isn't. Releases of Ghostscript are entirely FOSS from day 1. There's a huge difference between a FOSS project that sells exceptions, and a proprietary program that businesses have to buy a license for to use it all.