One of the big winners of the Unity debacle is the free and open source Godot Engine, which has seen its funding soar to a much more impressive level as Unity basically gave them free advertising.

One of the big winners of the Unity debacle is the free and open source Godot Engine, which has seen its funding soar to a much more impressive level as Unity basically gave them free advertising.

        • jimbo@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1616·
          1 year ago

          When did the term “open source” start including specifics about licensing terms? My understanding from the past few decades was that “open source” meant the source was available for people to look at and compile.

          • WaterSword@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
            215·
            1 year ago

            Open source has always meant under a free license. Being able to fork and publish your own versions is integral to the open source philosophy.

            • abbotsbury@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1116·
              1 year ago

              Being able to fork and publish your own versions is integral to the open source philosophy

              No, that is an enumerated freedom of the free software movement, not open source

              • WaterSword@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
                20·
                1 year ago

                Open-source software (OSS) 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. from Wikipedia

                The same article also talks about the difference between open source and source available:

                Although the OSI definition of “open-source software” is widely accepted, a small number of people and organizations use the term to refer to software where the source is available for viewing, but which may not legally be modified or redistributed. Such software is more often referred to as source-available, or as shared source, a term coined by Microsoft in 2001

                • abbotsbury@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  114·
                  1 year ago

                  Under that strict definition, software under the GNU GPL would not be “open source” because the license stays with the code, and is not truly “for any purpose,” which is the same deal with the Epic license: you may use, study, change, and distribute the Unreal source code, but it stays under Epic’s license.

                  If you are talking about the FREEDOM to fork and publish and share and whatever, then you mean Free software.

                  • heckypecky@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                    12·
                    1 year ago

                    You are not allowed to distribute unreal source. From their FAQ:

                    Unreal Engine licensees are permitted to post engine code snippets (up to 30 lines) in a public forum, but only for the purpose of discussing the content of the snippet

          • AProfessional@lemmy.worldEnglish
            6·
            1 year ago

            Ideas started in the 70s, Free Software Movement happened in the 80s, the term Open Source from the 90s as an alternative to “free” to be more clear.

            It always meant this.

        • abbotsbury@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1315·
          1 year ago

          It is source available

          Yes, open source.

          Not Open Source

          You mean free/libre? Open source literally just means you can see the source.

          • AProfessional@lemmy.worldEnglish
            132·
            1 year ago

            Open source is source code that is made freely available for possible modification and redistribution. Products include permission to use the source code,[1] design documents,[2] or content of the product. The open-source model is a decentralized software development model that encourages open collaboration.

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source