Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
To be fair:
If a source (code) is available to the public, with the intent by the original copyright owner, therefore an 'open' source, that does make it... An *open source.*
Don't think anyone said it has to be Free & Open Source (i.e. with a permissive license) for the source to be open, as you can still view and research the source either way - that's why there's the distinction, is there not?
Of course, whether it's freely whatever or not is up to the creator/maintainer.
Tbh nitpicking about the distinction and saying "uhm, ackshually it's source available" is pretty peak Linux user behavior and this is why we can't have nice things.
I get this'll be unpopular--and I don't really care, it's just my $0.02.
Look, most of my experience so far personally with FOSS is having some asshat take not even OpenFIRE code, but the EARLIER version of my publicly available gun4all code, both firm and gui, completely ruins the actual repo with their confusing as shit layout because they can't fathom how the Releases page works, undoes like a month's worth of my work, change obj names and renames it under a different brand with the sole intent to make money off my work.
This means YOU, Gonezo/Fusion Lightguns :|
So I'm kinda reconsidering the license so that at least we can maintain our brand and prevent both a Fusion or an AE Lightguns incident.
Like, I want the source to be freely available and have people contribute, but I also don't want people to run off and fucking steal my work wholesale and sell it off as their own thing. Shitty people are why we can't have nice things.
And I imagine if you too devoted... What, eight months of your life to something, you too might want to protect it a little.
Nothing really can prevent other people from doing that. If you both in very specific countries, some specific copyleft license might've helped you (at least forced third party to keep the source code open), but in other cases... eh... it would be a waste of time.
@a1ba at the end of the day they aren't doing anything necessarily *harmful* to myself or others and it's not like anyone's going to naturally stumble upon their 'work'... I *guess*.
But the individual in question clearly doesn't really know anything about the code they're touching, and there's more than a couple of major oversights I only recently noticed and resolved that they won't know how to deal with it. Other than trying to clone the new code again when it goes public.
*Weh.* 
But other than that... Why even try? In the end, people will know which version is superior because the other person doesn't know shit about your project and can't properly maintain it.