this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
137 points (100.0% liked)

Free and Open Source Software

17919 readers
58 users here now

If it's free and open source and it's also software, it can be discussed here. Subcommunity of Technology.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Gaywallet@beehaw.org
alyaza@beehaw.org
137
Grayjay is not Open Source (hiphish.github.io)
submitted 1 year ago by rglullis@communick.news to c/foss@beehaw.org
90 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Today FUTO released an application called Grayjay for Android-based mobile phones. Louis Rossmann introduced the application in a video (YouTube link). Grayjay as an application is very promising, but there is one point I take issue with: Grayjay is not an Open Source application. In the video Louis explains his reason behind the custom license, and while I do agree with his reason, I strong disagree with his method. In this post I will explain what Open Source means, how Grayjay does not meet the criteria, why this is an issue, and how it can be solved.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rwhitisissle@beehaw.org 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If it’s not OSI approved then it’s not open source.

OSI as an organization did not invent the concept of Open Source software. They just appointed themselves the arbiters of the term. There are other organizations and individuals that disagree with their definition.

[–] Maestro@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Most organisations and individuals that disagree with their definition are trying to sell you source available software as open source.

[–] rwhitisissle@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Cool. Somebody should let Richard Stallman know, I guess.

[–] Maestro@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

RMS doesn't disagree with OSI about the open source definition. He just thinks his Free Software definition is better. But RMS would most certainly not call "source available" software "open source"