- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@lemmy.smeargle.fans
- hackernews@derp.foo
- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@lemmy.smeargle.fans
- hackernews@derp.foo
You must log in or # to comment.
Translation: It’s proprietary “source available” software until January 2027, at which point it becomes free software and open source under the Apache 2.0 license.
It’s BSL so I guess open source but not “free software”?
Edit: okay as has been widely pointed out this is not an open source license. The text of the license says this. They have updated the post to (kind of) acknowledge this. They also state that this non-open source license “aligns strongly with our own open source goals and intent for Codecov at this time”, really committing to try to confuse whether or not they’re open source
The BSL violates point six of the open source definition, so isn’t open source https://opensource.org/osd/
I’d say it is open source but it is not libre software.
Nope. The Business Source License isn’t an open source license. https://opensource.org/licenses/ (not to be confused with the Boost Source License, which is open source).
It’s open core corporateware and shouldn’t count as free software regardless of the license.
Was wondering what the “catch” was as soon as I saw the title. Thanks.
One of my favorite PR checks. Glad to see this.
Is it like a git* alternative?
