3 ms·
I was not familiar with the BSL license. It's interesting that it will "automatically" switch to GPLv3 in 4 years (as specified in the license). Would be nice
by Timshel 2y ago
I was not familiar with the BSL license.
It's interesting that it will "automatically" switch to GPLv3 in 4 years (as specified in the license).
Would be nice if more closed source software were released with such a license.
Edit: the production Use Grant are atrocious :
> You may make production use of the Licensed Work, provided you do not use it in any of the following ways:
(1) Use the Licensed Work with a total of more than two users or one company or one thousand invoices.
- graemep 2y agoIf you have a single user you can use desktop software (I use Gnucash myself). If you have more than two users you cannot use it in production. SO it only useful if you have exactly two users. The SSPL seems far close to being open than the BSL.
- jstummbillig 2y agoIt's also useful as a single user if you prefer it over using desktop software, for the same reasons/tradeoff that it always is.
- sofixa 2y ago> I was not familiar with the BSL license. > It's interesting that it will "automatically" switch to GPLv3 in 4 years (as specified in the license). > Would be nice if more closed source software were released with such a license. And it would be nice if there was a better term than "source available" to describe licenses such as BSL and SSPL, and ideally to differentiate usage grants. GitHub project under BSL with the above very constraining usage grant vs GitLab project BSL with "do whatever you want just don't host to sell to others" vs code with no license thrown on a .zip on an FTP are all "source available".