Microblog
in reply to @ 2016-53 18:24 UTCPermissive would be safest to allow use on Appstore, but see https://www.reddit.com/r/opensource/comments/4779o0/opensourcing_an_apsstore_app/d0as3v1 MPL might work
in reply to @ 2016-53 17:22 UTCMPL might be appstore compatible, see: https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1762/is-the-mozilla-public-license-compatible-with-apples-app-store
in reply to @ 2016-53 16:55 UTCAll I need is to prevent someone making commercial profit out of MY app!
If you want to inhibit big corporate exploitation, then copyleft is often enough. The situation is somewhat complicated because most copyleft licenses prevent an app from being put on the Apple appstore (because of Apple's terms). It would not prevent you from putting it on the appstore of course (unless you accept patches).
If you actually wish to prohibit commercial use of your app, you will find that such a prohibition is incompatible with the Open Source Definition: https://opensource.org/osd
in reply to @ 2016-53 13:08 UTCAny plans for a non-steam version?
in reply to @ 2016-51 04:11 UTCI said this in my other comment, but to be very clear: the only good way to do this is with a third-party signing server, which could be libre or not (obviously we hope that it is). You want third party verification, so you need a third party.
in reply to @ 2016-51 04:09 UTCit is impossible for us or our clients to modify the test results after the fact
Unless they are server-side storage only (in which case the software could be libre on a third party server to get the same effect) or it's digitally signed by a remote server (also very easy with libre software) this to totally false. Locally-produced, locally-stored digital data can always be modified.
in reply to @ 2016-50 13:14 UTCOr we should get a project going to turn the GPL's read-only implementation inside of GRUB into a kernel module, and then improve it to a much higher level of compatibility.
in reply to @ 2016-49 22:24 UTCHeh. You should try dwm ๐
in reply to @ 2016-49 22:23 UTCI've been switching all my users to LXDE. More familiar to them than most other interfaces, and runs well on just about anything
in reply to @ 2016-49 17:08 UTCIs this a future plan? It's not in the repos today (I just looked)
in reply to @ 2016-49 17:06 UTCI believe the argument is that the parts change to make it work with Linux are the derived part
in reply to @ 2016-49 17:05 UTCI just checked, and Debian does not distribute even the DKMS. They only distribute FUSE (and, of course, the FreeBSD module for Debian/kFreeBSD)
in reply to @ 2016-49 17:01 UTCWell. IIRC they don't really make a lot of profits. But they hope to
in reply to @ 2016-49 16:32 UTCSo far, the courts have sided with the vendors that ship non-free drivers.
ref? Experts I ask say there have been no court decisions on this yet.
in reply to @ 2016-49 15:46 UTCthat's why ZFS on FreeBSD is no problem at all
GPL in FreeBSD is no problem either, though they tend to dislike it more, it is legal to distribute ๐
in reply to @ 2016-49 05:18 UTCWell, currently powertop shows a pretty constant 10 wakeups per ms from tor — highest idle process on my system besides syncthing. So I was just wondering if there's anything it's doing while idle that I might not need, etc, to reduce battery usage, since it's a big user
in reply to @ 2016-48 13:40 UTCI really hope support for gnu social gets added as well.
in reply to @ 2016-46 04:24 UTCI think you can even make money selling binaries. There are several projects that try that in various ways (Conversations is one of them), but it isn't nearly as popular as services, etc
in reply to @ 2016-45 16:28 UTCThe claims this article starts with could be refuted with mere minutes of research. There are several people and companies in my town who make money off open source without proprietary relicensing or other stuff. They all sell services (because that's the most popular business model, or because that's what they wanted to do, I believe there are other options).