3 ms·
> Sentry is marked as "NOPE" even though it is basically open source (any commit older than two years is), In other words, current Sentry isn't Open Source, b
by JoshTriplett 1y ago
> Sentry is marked as "NOPE" even though it is basically open source (any commit older than two years is),
In other words, current Sentry isn't Open Source, but old versions are available. I think it's a fair characterization that Sentry is not Open Source, unless there's an actual community around the Open Source version.
- the_mitsuhiko 1y agoHaving a community is not necessary for licenses to have a certain effect. I made the argument in the past that the FSL gives you more rights than the AGPL, it just does it slightly later. The effect however is greater. See https://lucumr.pocoo.org/2023/11/19/cathedral-and-bazaaar-licensing/ https://lucumr.pocoo.org/2023/11/19/cathedral-and-bazaaar-li...
- zvr 1y agoI agree with the first part ("current Sentry isn't Open Source"), not with the second one ("unless there's an actual community"). A software can be Open Source without actual development community. Ah, wait -- you don't say that Open Source requires a community. You state that, if there was interest in the older version of Sentry, then that version could be considered as Open Source. I agree with this one as well, then. [I considered deleting this comment, but maybe it will be useful to others who have not read closely.]
- JoshTriplett 1y agoRight, exactly. I'm not saying a project must have a community in order to be Open Source. I'm saying in order to be considered for a list like this, something should be a project in its own right rather than just a stale version of another project.