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.

  • Maestro@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    If it’s not OSI approved then it’s not open source. I hate it when companies try to dilute the open source moniker. This is “source available”

    • rwhitisissle@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

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

          • Maestro@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            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”

      • Maestro@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because the OSI has been defining and stewarding open source for 25 years. It is the de facto definition and has been recognised as such by multiple governments around the world. Anyone trying to muddy the waters is probably trying to sell you their “source available” software as open source.

      • jack@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Show me “any other defintion” of open source that is as widely known and accepted as the one from OSI.