Hacker News Reader

Until they change their license from FOSS to something source available or proprietary like many OSS projects are doing these days. If it's successful, it won't be open source for long.

View on HN

Yes thats true, however, it also means the baseline features till the lockdown were open sourced & are secured for public. Now they have to value add over those. this process is slow but surely moves more basic/hardened stuff to public domain so should reduce rent-seeking behavior. if nothing else it will make likes of adobe to keep shelling out cash to squash any existential risks like figma. I'll take that.

The only really evil things can come from the likes of google anti-fragmentation agreement where essentially you are marked with a Scarlett letter if you didn't go all-in into google proprietary ecosystem. But we have FCC to protect us from that, right?

Without a community, an open source code repository is text files you can use to run or compile an application. An open source project needs maintainers, active contributors, a roadmap, etc. Github is full of very popular open source projects that have been completely abandoned, and forks of those projects that are also abandoned. An open source project having maintainers after a company has abandoned it is not the default. Sometimes it happens because the company nurtured an open source community before abandoning it, sometimes it happens because the project is crucial enough it scratches enough itches to attract volunteers. Sometimes it happens out of spite. But those are exceptions, not the rule.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com