Re-Licensing Sentry

Re:Re-Licensing Sentry by xyzzyz on Wednesday November 06, 2019 @04:15PM (#21467385)

Although we’ve come to refer to the BSL as eventually open-source since it converts to an OSI-approved license at the conversion date, due to the grant restriction, it is formally not an open-source license.

Yes, they don't call it that. Seems like the actual open source advocates will hector them before they even start.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Re-Licensing Sentry by rectang on Wednesday November 06, 2019 @04:27PM (#21467551)

Wrong. They call it an "OSS" license:

> It’s a brave new world, but we believe this licensing change will best ensure the future of Sentry and that protections-oriented OSS licenses like the BSL will become increasingly common as time goes on.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Re-Licensing Sentry by Aeolun on Wednesday November 06, 2019 @04:58PM (#21467922)

Probably because the source is still open. This whole discussion strongly reminds me that open-source and free software are not the same.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Re-Licensing Sentry by rectang on Wednesday November 06, 2019 @05:02PM (#21467964)

This sort of confusion is exactly why this battle is worth fighting.

The proper term for licenses like the BSL is "source available". You can view the source, but you cannot use it under terms which conform to the Open Source Definition.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Re-Licensing Sentry by BYK on Wednesday November 06, 2019 @06:34PM (#21468765)

This now has been rectified. Apologies for the misrepresentation, wasn't intentional.

[ Parent | on HN ]