CopperheadOS: Security features, installing apps, and more (opensource.com)
CopperheadOS: Security features, installing apps, and more (opensource.com)
Posted Jan 30, 2018 2:30 UTC (Tue) by pabs (subscriber, #43278)In reply to: CopperheadOS: Security features, installing apps, and more (opensource.com) by thestinger
Parent article: CopperheadOS: Security features, installing apps, and more (opensource.com)
Uh...
Posted Jan 30, 2018 2:59 UTC (Tue)
by thestinger (guest, #91827)
[Link] (3 responses)
I don't think it makes any sense to say a project with a clause like the JSON / JSLint licenses is "not open source" and the same goes for a commercial usage clause. I'll buy into the idea that it makes it non-free/non-libre.
On that note, GPL3 forbids mixing the code with the Linux kernel (GPL2) or making an immutable hardware chain of trust for verified boot which both sound like usage restrictions to me. The *BSDs seeing GPL as non-free isn't without merit. This is something subjective, not at all objective.
Posted Jan 30, 2018 10:55 UTC (Tue)
by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239)
[Link] (2 responses)
This is one of the reasons that "open source" is a bad term. It makes absolute sense to say that - it's the literal definition of the term, but it's a term that can be easily misunderstood.
> GPL3 forbids mixing the code with the Linux kernel (GPL2)
Plenty of licenses are incompatible with each other - GPL3 is not unique in this respect.
> The *BSDs seeing GPL as non-free isn't without merit.
OpenBSD considers copyleft licenses to be less free than BSD licenses, but does not assert that they're non-free.
Posted Jan 30, 2018 12:39 UTC (Tue)
by thestinger (guest, #91827)
[Link] (1 responses)
Licenses placing significant restrictions on usage of the code compared to permissive ones.
> OpenBSD considers copyleft licenses to be less free than BSD licenses, but does not assert that they're non-free.
They consider them less free to the point that OpenBSD and FreeBSD are very actively purging GPL code even when it means doing a lot of work or accepting compromises. I do think they get commonly referred to as not free nowadays.
Posted Jan 30, 2018 13:46 UTC (Tue)
by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)
[Link]
I have never seen any of the BSD developers claim that GPL is non-free. It is merely not a permissive license and it is fair for them to want to remove it from their base OS because of licensing ideology
CopperheadOS: Security features, installing apps, and more (opensource.com)
CopperheadOS: Security features, installing apps, and more (opensource.com)
CopperheadOS: Security features, installing apps, and more (opensource.com)
CopperheadOS: Security features, installing apps, and more (opensource.com)