> We hope to better define what sustainable open source models can look like, including semi-restrictive licenses like the BUSL The BUSL, by the author's own a

> We hope to better define what sustainable open source models can look like, including semi-restrictive licenses like the BUSL The BUSL, by the author's own admission, is not open source. Therefore, its inclusion is mutually exclusive with a "sustainable open source model". If you don't want to use an open source license, then don't use an open source license. Stop trying to convince the rest of us that your not-open-source license has any place in open source software; such gaslighting reeks of deception and bad faith, and nullifies whatever sort of "apology" this post ostensibly contains. Transparency is a dependency of trust. I usually say that (like a broken record) as it pertains to code, but it applies just as much to business practices and conduct. If you can't be honest about whether or not your software is open source, how am I supposed to trust any other aspect of it?