Hacker News Reader

Comment by ddevault | Hacker News Reader

SourceHut is not proprietary. It is 100% free software (mostly AGPL) and provides tools to migrate your data between hosted or self-hosted instances.

View on HN

There's no guarantee that sr.ht (the "repo provider") is running upstream SourceHut (the AGPL software). I do believe that it is, but there's simply no way to guarantee it, so it would be reasonable to consider a non-self-hosted SourceHut instance as proprietary.

(Again, to be clear I'm just playing devil's advocate with the semantics. I personally don't believe that sr.ht is doing anything nefarious.)

I don't think that's a reasonable take. We are legally obligated to publish the source code running on our servers because we have incorporated code from others under the terms of the AGPL, without asking for them to assign copyright to us. This take also seems especially outlandish considering that the context is comparing SourceHut to GitHub, which is very clearly more proprietary even in this awkward sense.

>We are legally obligated to publish the source code running on our servers

This is not a guarantee until it is challenged in court or audited by some trusted auditor.

>This take also seems especially outlandish considering that the context is comparing SourceHut to GitHub, which is very clearly more proprietary even in this awkward sense.

No disagreement there.

I still find the insinuation quite ridiculous, to be entirely honest.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com