3 ms·
It's closer to "shared source" or "source available". The license is not compliant with the OSD[1] which is the de-facto (but not de jure, for you pedants out t
by mindcrime 3y ago
It's closer to "shared source" or "source available". The license is not compliant with the OSD[1] which is the de-facto (but not de jure, for you pedants out there) definition of "Open Source" in common usage.
[1]: https://opensource.org/osd/ https://opensource.org/osd/
- jraph 3y ago> but not de jure, for you pedants out there This means that the term "open source" is not legally defined (and not recognized by lawyer / judges) [and the OSD], right?
- mindcrime 3y agoYes, "de jure" more or less translates to "by law", and "de facto" is something like "by practice" or "by convention". So the Open Source Initiative folks have no legal basis to enforce use of their definition, but in practice it's so widely used and acknowledged that for all practical purposes it is the definition.