alt Hacker NewsI'm sad to see this. I supported Bear because it was open source. As that's no longer the case, I just canceled my membership.
I would love to see this reversed and moved to AGPL instead.
Replies
fastball • today at 5:10 AM
What is the difference (to you) between open source and source available?
➕ show 1 reply
I think this is fair, by both Bear and yourself. He's free to attach any license he likes, you are free to use it or not.
Obviously the goal of Open Source licenses does not include making money. You might, or might not, but it's not a priority.
Equally your goal may be to only support Open Source projects. That's fine. For you removing support for this project makes sense.
Once a project reaches the stage of needing to create an income stream, Open Source licenses are no longer appropriate.
Yes, some developers are naive in thinking Open Source licenses protect their income stream. Yes some users are naive in thinking that projects will remain Open Source forever.
Source-available, or Shipped-with-source of whatever you want to call it is a proprietary license which is just fine. It's not Open Source, nor does it need to be.