Something to think about
"Licenses alone do not govern behavior in Open Source"
@codeberg this touches upon other discussions of software freedom; for example the trend of some to try to declare their software can only be used by "good" organizations, often by ones own arbitrary definition of what constitutes "good". Freedom is both rather binary and universal, so is rather hard to make arbitrary. Is it even freedom if it is only allowed for a few?? I tend not to think so.
@codeberg this also touches upon two problems with open source. It emphasis process over purpose. It also ends up being about developers. The #gnu manifesto and #gpl were not about the process of making it easier for developers to interchange code. It is a radically user focused and user empowering license.
@codeberg "Seems like an author that doesn’t understand the spirit of FOSS." Comments like that are exactly the biggest problem in FOSS.
@codeberg the second biggest problem is I can just feel some keyboard warrior on the fedi itching to challenge me on that statement
Thanks for sharing this. Its important that we learn & discuss about such things.
There are lots of FOSS developers who feel like this. Even though they're not legally obliged to fix bugs or maintain the project, they feel morally/socially responsible to do so.
Its also true that there are lots of lesser known (but important) FOSS projects that receive little to no support at all, compared to other popular ones.
This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!