4 ms·
In general I'd agree with that, but IMO the benefit of having a FOSS alternative to a proprietary product overrides it in this case.
by josephcsible 2y ago
In general I'd agree with that, but IMO the benefit of having a FOSS alternative to a proprietary product overrides it in this case.
- fao_ 2y agoSee this is where I and the FSF/OSI diverge, because > the right to use, copy, modify, merge, publish and distribute the Software [as long as you're not selling it or derivatives of the Software] seems to line up with exactly what the folks involved in Free Software originally wanted — the ability to fix, patch, debug software that runs on their systems. I also think it's incredibly important to have non-commercial clauses given that the vast majority of technical infrastructure in the modern world is built on FOSS, all while the companies give nothing back and developers of FOSS starve. If Valve can dump hundreds of developers into FOSS and within, what, 7 years? bring Linux almost to parity with and performance of Windows for gaming, imagine what would happen if FOSS developers were actually given funding!