> The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
> The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
From CodeCov's BSL which goes directly against the above:
> You may make use of the Licensed Work, provided that you do not use the Licensed Work for a Competing Service.
-----
With that said, huge applaud to CodeCov for even making the code public under a BSL license, it's obviously a great step compared to status quo. I just wish they'd call it "Source Available/Public" instead of "Open Source" as many already seem to have troubles with what open source means.
[disclosure: I'm Head of Open Source at Sentry, which owns Codecov.]
Or, more elegantly, "CodeCov is now Source Available".
Change Date:2023-06-29 2027-01-01
Change License: Apache License, Version 2.0
Effective on the Change Date, or the fourth anniversary of the first publicly available distribution of a specific version of the Licensed Work under this License, whichever comes first, the Licensor hereby grants you rights under the terms of the Change License, and the rights granted in the paragraph above terminate.
Standard open-source but you can't use it in a competing commercial offering.