4 ms·

During a quick scan of the catalog I found a few issues. Sentry isn't open source, even after their most recent license change. The Business Source License and

During a quick scan of the catalog I found a few issues. Sentry isn't open source, even after their most recent license change. The Business Source License and variants are source available, not open source. FireCMS is built on top of Firebase, rather than being an alternative to it. It's a similar story with the Jira CLI. They're open source, but they're useless without the backend to talk to. Plausible Analytics and Papermark are both listed twice. Rustdesk is also listed twice, once as Rustdeck. The GIMP isn't listed under photoshop. This was a surprise omission. Many of these projects have commercial backers who offer a paid SaaS offering. Given this is the case I'm not sure linking to SaaS product site when claiming your site offers "Open-source alternatives to tools You pay for" is the expected behaviour. I was expecting it to link to the open source code.

cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
I’d bet a fair bit on most realistic users of this website benefiting from Sentry’s inclusion, rather than being hindered by it. I suppose that maybe this website could be re-labelled ‘source-available’ to appease purists that actually care about this. But practically everyone won’t be affected by the fact that Sentry’s license prohibits creating a direct competitor to Sentry’s hosted service, certainly the intended audience.
- toenail 3y ago
  > I suppose that maybe this website could be re-labelled ‘source-available’ to appease purists that actually care about this. Huh, maybe? Words have meaning. It's not about "appeasing purists", it's about not spreading misinformation.
- creesch 3y ago
  Bit of a tone deaf response to be honest. Not to mention that you are only responding to a very specific bit of the feedback.
SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago
> The GIMP isn't listed under photoshop. This was a surprise omission. Photopea is listed and is not open source. To my knowledge it's not even source available.
mkesper 3y ago
Llama is not open source, either, despite Meta calling it that.
- andy99 3y ago
  Also, llama (a link to Meta's site which is effectively a roundabout way to get the model weights) is proposed as an alternative to OpenAI. Open AI offers a full API, chatgpt, etc, llama(2) is some weights, they're not really parallel alternatives. HF would be a better link, you can pay them to serve open source models I believe.
- johnrushx 3y ago
  do you know good open source LLMs I can add?
andy99 3y ago
A better name would be "Free (gratis) alternatives". The point here seems to be finding software you don't have to pay for rather than anything specifically about open source.
- pydry 3y ago
  There is zero practical difference between "free and source available" and "open source" for 99.99% of users. I do wonder sometimes why some people get so particular about drawing this specific distinction because it happens on so many threads. Is the freedom to run a competitor to sentry's saas using the code they wrote that coveted a freedom? I can see why Bezos wants this, perhaps. And by extension wealthy big tech shareholders eating that profit too.... but who else? Moreover, "Source available" (a suggested alternative) implies the software is potentially or even likely to be paid which is material difference for those 99.9% of users but is definitely not the case. I get the sense that there is an underlying political ax being ground by gatekeeping this particular definition. I dont buy that this is about "just calling things by their name" when for non-bezos users the distinction is inconsequential.
  - vitiral 3y ago
    The difference is the freedom to modify, fix, and even fork for yourself if the need arises.
    - pydry 3y ago
      That is not the difference. You can do all of that with sentry.
    - ezekg 3y ago
      You obviously know nothing of the licenses you're discussing. It's so frustrating to see this fallacy repeated over and over. SSPL, ELv2, BUSL, and FSL are all forkable. Most even more so than GPL!
      - vitiral 3y ago
johnrushx 3y ago
thx a lot, you've done an impressive scan. I will fix the data

cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago

I’d bet a fair bit on most realistic users of this website benefiting from Sentry’s inclusion, rather than being hindered by it. I suppose that maybe this website could be re-labelled ‘source-available’ to appease purists that actually care about this. But practically everyone won’t be affected by the fact that Sentry’s license prohibits creating a direct competitor to Sentry’s hosted service, certainly the intended audience.

toenail 3y ago
> I suppose that maybe this website could be re-labelled ‘source-available’ to appease purists that actually care about this. Huh, maybe? Words have meaning. It's not about "appeasing purists", it's about not spreading misinformation.
creesch 3y ago
Bit of a tone deaf response to be honest. Not to mention that you are only responding to a very specific bit of the feedback.

SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago

> The GIMP isn't listed under photoshop. This was a surprise omission. Photopea is listed and is not open source. To my knowledge it's not even source available.

mkesper 3y ago

Llama is not open source, either, despite Meta calling it that.

andy99 3y ago
Also, llama (a link to Meta's site which is effectively a roundabout way to get the model weights) is proposed as an alternative to OpenAI. Open AI offers a full API, chatgpt, etc, llama(2) is some weights, they're not really parallel alternatives. HF would be a better link, you can pay them to serve open source models I believe.
johnrushx 3y ago
do you know good open source LLMs I can add?

andy99 3y ago

A better name would be "Free (gratis) alternatives". The point here seems to be finding software you don't have to pay for rather than anything specifically about open source.

pydry 3y ago
There is zero practical difference between "free and source available" and "open source" for 99.99% of users. I do wonder sometimes why some people get so particular about drawing this specific distinction because it happens on so many threads. Is the freedom to run a competitor to sentry's saas using the code they wrote that coveted a freedom? I can see why Bezos wants this, perhaps. And by extension wealthy big tech shareholders eating that profit too.... but who else? Moreover, "Source available" (a suggested alternative) implies the software is potentially or even likely to be paid which is material difference for those 99.9% of users but is definitely not the case. I get the sense that there is an underlying political ax being ground by gatekeeping this particular definition. I dont buy that this is about "just calling things by their name" when for non-bezos users the distinction is inconsequential.
- vitiral 3y ago
  The difference is the freedom to modify, fix, and even fork for yourself if the need arises.
  - pydry 3y ago
    That is not the difference. You can do all of that with sentry.
  - ezekg 3y ago
    You obviously know nothing of the licenses you're discussing. It's so frustrating to see this fallacy repeated over and over. SSPL, ELv2, BUSL, and FSL are all forkable. Most even more so than GPL!
    - vitiral 3y ago

johnrushx 3y ago

thx a lot, you've done an impressive scan. I will fix the data