Oddbean new post about | logout
▲ ▼
73 million seconds | 1 years ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 @c6d0060b do you mean they publish some source code but don’t even accept any patches under any circumstances?
▲ ▼
Roni Laukkarinen | 1 years ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 @16555d14 I phrased that a bit wrong. What I mean is that how can anyone contribute when they don't have access to anything in the first place? And if people do, I'm sure they won't accept any changes since they won't match their objectives.

They "publish" code like Twitter, but leave the core usable part out of it. It's all marketing. All pull requests are by employees.
▲ ▼
Pimm | 1 years ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 @c6d0060b @16555d14 Accepting contributions from the community is definitely not a requirement for being open source.
▲ ▼
Roni Laukkarinen | 1 years ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 @067cce20 Not what I said, but it is a nuance. I just answered to @16555d14's question about accepting patches.

Open source by definition (Wikipedia): Open-source software is computer software that is released under a license in which the copyright holder grants users the rights to use, study, change, and distribute the software and its source code to anyone and for any purpose. Open-source software may be developed in a collaborative, public manner.

If it's not usable, changeable, distributable, in my world it is not fully open source.