We want legislation requiring that publicly financed software developed for the public sector be made publicly available under a Free and Open Source Software licence. If it is public money, it should be public code as well.
I’d go even further than that. I’d require any (unless confidential) code development to be open and freely available. Meaning, if you buy a license to use software, that software should be open source.
It should be like on our private devices where we only install proprietary stuff if it is inevitable like a baking app.
EU is having a good stance on the issue. afaik, EUPL that they use is also a free license.
They want to prevent coders from dictating terms. It’s about perceived control/power over coders and ensuring whatever power coders wield is dispelled thru legalese spells.
Have written lots of open source as well as packages which are not published. The amount of contributions measured in issues/PRs/funding has been the same. Absolutely none.
Lost any incentive to care about debating licenses’ purity.
I’d go even further than that. I’d require any (unless confidential) code development to be open and freely available. Meaning, if you buy a license to use software, that software should be open source.
It should be like on our private devices where we only install proprietary stuff if it is inevitable like a baking app.
EU is having a good stance on the issue. afaik, EUPL that they use is also a free license.
Why the fuck would they create a new license? That’s concerning.
They want to prevent coders from dictating terms. It’s about perceived control/power over coders and ensuring whatever power coders wield is dispelled thru legalese spells.
Have written lots of open source as well as packages which are not published. The amount of contributions measured in issues/PRs/funding has been the same. Absolutely none.
Lost any incentive to care about debating licenses’ purity.