• Ferk@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I guess it’s better than not providing any source code. What’s wrong is calling it “open source” when it isn’t.

    VVVVVV and Anodyne are some examples of “source available” games.

    • toastal@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not what I am arguing, but we do have two issues: 1) naming/branding for these types of licenses 2) FOSS banshees acting like these licenses aren’t acceptable & the whole idea is binary good or evil

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        As long as we don’t call them free, libre, or open source I don’t care. We shouldn’t make the terminology any more confusing for those.

        • toastal@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          There’s limited vocab to choose from & source available isn’t an appealing one

          • Ferk@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Yeah, it definitely is more appealing from a marketing perspective.

            I do understand why some projects might wanna use the term, it’s to their advantage to be associated with “open source” even if the source code itself has a proprietary license.

            The problem is that then it makes it harder / more confusing to check for actually openly licensed code, since then it’s not clear what term to use. Already “free software” can be confused with “free as in free beer”.

            • toastal@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Right. We want clear labels else they become meaningless like “boost immune system”. There probably is something that can fix the phrasing when someone finds it, but it also must not be poisoned by those going too hard into free software as a lifestyle or corporations looking to circumvent the premise. What it should be called tho, I don’t know.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            It doesn’t really roll off the tongue, I get it, but it’s the best and most widely used term for software whose source is available to view but not modify and/or redistribute.