bsnnkv

komorebi mentioned!

Pretty much this. Wild that you can traverse most of China in affordable high speed trains, yet the Amtrak from Seattle to Portland barely crawls along and has to regularly stop for long periods of time because the tracks get too hot in the Summer.

Yep, this kind of attitude is even more reason to reject the broken status quo.

And this is why all new projects by independent developers should seriously consider using a post-open source license before defaulting to corporate-friendly/corporate-first OSI licenses

> any time someone says something is post-$thing it means what they are doing is in dialogue with and in response to $thing. “we were doing that before $thing” no, you can’t be in dialogue with something that hasn’t happened yet.

> this is like saying “what do you mean post-modernist architecture, architecture predates modernism”.

https://lobste.rs/s/kaftkn/i_started_identifying_corporate_d...

Relevant articles are here

- https://lgug2z.com/articles/normalize-identifying-corporate-...

- https://lgug2z.com/articles/i-started-identifying-corporate-...

The post-open source space is indeed a very exciting space in 2026

> created: 46 days ago

Checks out

> Giving something away for free and then whining that people use it for free confuses me. I mean, what did you think would happen?

Such a weird thing to reply to someone who very publicly disavows the use of open source licensing for individuals

> If you don't want to give your software away for free, don't give your software away for free.

I don't, and I spend a lot of my time and efforts encouraging others not to, and doing the work to prove out alternative models :)

https://lgug2z.com/articles/normalize-identifying-corporate-...

https://lgug2z.com/articles/komorebi-financial-breakdown-for...

Not a great take.

Corporations who use and benefit from software should be made to pay for their use of that software, but they don't want to, which is why they'll happily spend money promoting the use of corporate-friendly and maximally exploitable open source licensing among the passionate individuals who maintain the lions share of their dependency tree.

https://lgug2z.com/articles/on-evils-in-software-licensing/

I'm a fan of this. My own projects on GitHub have an action[1] which autocloses and autolocks any opened issues until they have been reviewed and accepted by me, and I only consider feature requests from sponsors.

The real miss here is that there isn't a way on GitHub to only allow maintainers to create issues, instead we are left with these subpar workarounds.

[1]: https://github.com/LGUG2Z/komorebi/blob/master/.github/workf...

Nice to see some more interesting use of this kind of educational source licensing

The experiment is end-user mediated wealth redistribution from large corporations by leveraging reimbursement mechanisms, and so far I'm content with the results

Not consistently, but there have been a few months this year where I have hit $500 selling individual commercial use licenses for my tiling window manager[1]

https://lgug2z.com/software/komorebi

I also think this naming is misleading - there is a very clear association with "bare metal", which is not what is being offered here

Fwiw I think this is the right approach. The trade-off between stability across OS updates vs tracking performance is a no-brainer for me - the absolute last thing that I would want is a deluge of bug reports with no other information than "it stopped working" when Apple pushes out an update

Took a look at this and it feels like it is implemented using public macOS frameworks so it shouldn't break between macOS updates

My guess is that kAXWindowMovedNotification, kAXWindowResizedNotification, kAXMainWindowChangedNotification etc. are being listened to on the currently focused window using the Accessibility framework, and there is a callback which gets the latest position of the tracked window whenever it is fired, and uses that position as a reference to update the border position

The border window itself is most likely an NSWindow, which is why the tracking of the border with the target window feels quite sluggish

It's very sad that none of these Linux DEs expose APIs for customization in anything other than JavaScript - I would love to be able to build on Gnome or KDE with something equivalent to windows-rs or objc2

I'd love to read more wherever this came from if you could link the source

Great to see more projects not opting into licenses which permit megacorp exploitation by default

Would love to see someone running this theme + a tiling window manager!

On another discussion forum I saw someone posted[1] the results of running shellcheck against the bash scripts that make up Omarchy:

    λ omarchy master Ɇ » shellcheck -f checkstyle bin/* **/*.sh | grep error | wc -l
    451
    λ omarchy master Ɇ » cloc .
         662 text files.
         473 unique files.
         253 files ignored.

    github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 2.06  T=0.07 s (6645.0 files/s, 133055.1 lines/s)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Language                      files          blank        comment           code
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Bourne Again Shell              125            704            319           3344
    Bourne Shell                    237            499            229           1952
    CSS                              41            122             22            653
    TOML                             19            113              9            612
    XML                               3              6             12            437
    Lua                              12              0              0            151
    INI                              14             20              0             78
    JSON                             13              0              0             67
    YAML                              4              4              0             50
    Text                              2              0              0             36
    JavaScript                        1              1              0             20
    Markdown                          1              5              0              5
    SVG                               1              0              0              1
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    SUM:                            473           1474            591           7406
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]: https://lobste.rs/s/iuvukw/word_on_omarchy#c_slymk9

"While corporations were once opposed to this model of software licensing, fearing the reduction of the Exchange-Value of their own products as a side effect of its widespread adoption, they ultimately realized that this software licensing model represented another socialized model of production which could be privately appropriated."

The Accessibility framework is not what I would call a "hack" personally. It was quite well thought out and fully featured

I've spent the last month working on something similar in Rust with various macOS framework bindings and it's not really that scary

You don't really need anything other than a Rust dev env, rust-analyzer and a browser window with the Apple docs website and the objc2 crate docs.rs site open - no special XCode craziness required

komorebi is coming to macOS[1] soon :)

[1]: https://youtu.be/u3eJcsa_MJk?si=UnHjFXBsWir4QiTz

Maybe we can solve the "free" vs "libre" vs "open" debate first

> subtlying implying that open-source is old and past it

It's really not that deep; U2 and Mogwai exist in the same timeline, in the same shared canon of contemporary music.

> It's a pre-open source license

This statement is strictly ahistorical; the earliest software licenses which made source code available to everyone and included restrictions on redistribution and/or use date back to the late 1990s[1][2].

You can certainly _try_ to make the case that these are the same as the Xerox license, but I don't think it would be a very strong one.

[1]: https://spdx.org/licenses/Aladdin.html

[2]: https://spdx.org/licenses/QPL-1.0.html

> there will never not be the risk of a slide into more single-corporation-friendly "source available" realms

There is something off about this to me in a world where FOSS exists in it's present form primarily to the outsized benefit of hyperscalers and entrenched incumbents

There was a post on another forum earlier this week on this same broad topic which resonated deeply with me, as someone (who like most of the US population) is a layoff and a medical emergency away from ruin:

> When I started getting interested in open source, I had problems like unreliable software, the inability to inspect or improve it, limited experience with collaborating. Open source solved those, but now my most pressing problem is that the excellent software I use is undermaintained and outright abandoned because the creators can't afford to keep donating time to it. Open source has been a process for solving problems, not the end goal. If it's not capable of solving problems, it's time for new approaches.[1]

[1]: https://lobste.rs/c/d4kmra

I'm not sure what else you and others who make these kinds of comments are looking for from projects like these who are already explicitly and clearly stating that they are _not_ FOSS projects

It's as if you don't want source code to be available _at all_ unless it's under a FOSS license

As much as I appreciate a good snarky comment, this is a good reminder for contributors to be thoughtful about the licenses under which they contribute code to projects

> Nowhere in any common open license does anyone promise to keep working on their project, much less on particular terms. Any contributor to a permissively-licensed project can license their next contribution however they want. Any steward of a copyleft project with rights to all contributions can, too. Much as you could pick an Apache-licensed project, fork it, and sell your enhanced version under proprietary terms, a project steward can share new work under new terms, as well.

>

> None of this changes the license terms for old releases. Prior versions with MIT or Apache 2 or MPLv2 or what have you in the LICENSE file remain available to use, share, and change under those terms. That includes forking. We see that every time a going-forward relicensing spawns a new one. The reason the new license terms matter for new releases is that those new license terms apply to the diff between the old release and the new one.[1]

[1]: https://writing.kemitchell.com/2023/09/23/Two-Kinds-Relicens...