3 ms·
> I think they clearly state that the fresh versions are not open source, they are "source available". To me it reads like they chose to switch to a proprietar
by arinlen 4y ago
> I think they clearly state that the fresh versions are not open source, they are "source available".
To me it reads like they chose to switch to a proprietary license but don't want to be subjected to the natural consequences of betraying the trust of their userbase.
- froh 4y agoisn't their point the breach of trust of large (>25mio revenue) business users of their software to not contribute financially to the developer staff (subscription)? open source creators are systematically abused by large companies who free ride despite being able to financially contribute, and they just don't because they can. "why give the creator a fair share if you can keep them alive with a few graceful breadcrumbs" seems to be such corporations way of thinking, highly profitable formally but the FOSS creators. thus an agpl, thus the new Akka license.