From today the license applied to the project will be the Apache 2.0 license with an extra line forbidding usage of the codebase as an integration or app to Atlassian's Confluence or Jira products....
It seems “open source” means different things for different people.
If you could see the code but were not allowed to redistribute it then I’d call it “source-available”… but you can redistribute the code, in this unusual case.
Forbidding reselling to any degree makes it “non-free” (as in freedom), which is the important part. The term “open source” was created to speak about “free software” without the moral or political aspects of user freedom.
Draw.io says it will use Apache but “with an extra line forbidding usage (…)”. It is not the normal Apache license. The extra line is a big difference in principle.
I hate scamming people but I think that should be fixed in another way.
Removed by mod
It seems “open source” means different things for different people.
If you could see the code but were not allowed to redistribute it then I’d call it “source-available”… but you can redistribute the code, in this unusual case.
Forbidding reselling to any degree makes it “non-free” (as in freedom), which is the important part. The term “open source” was created to speak about “free software” without the moral or political aspects of user freedom.
Removed by mod
Draw.io says it will use Apache but “with an extra line forbidding usage (…)”. It is not the normal Apache license. The extra line is a big difference in principle.
I hate scamming people but I think that should be fixed in another way.
Removed by mod