sag@lemm.ee to Open Source@lemmy.ml · 2 months agoOpen-sourcing of WinAmp goes badly as owners delete entire repowww.theregister.comexternal-linkmessage-square22fedilinkarrow-up1255arrow-down10file-text
arrow-up1255arrow-down1external-linkOpen-sourcing of WinAmp goes badly as owners delete entire repowww.theregister.comsag@lemm.ee to Open Source@lemmy.ml · 2 months agomessage-square22fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareSupermariofan67linkfedilinkarrow-up52·2 months agoWinamp published their code as “open source”. Problem is… It wasn’t open source, it was proprietary but you can see the source code. Their custom license didn’t even allow forks, which is against GitHub TOS The codebase apparently contains proprietary code from third parties that they don’t have the right to relicense. The codebase apparently contains GPL code from third parties that they probably didn’t have the right to make proprietary in the first place
minus-squaresuperglue@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2 months agoOn top of that, when told about the proprietary code, they deleted it from the repository thinking that was just the end if it. So they didn’t have any idea how git works either.
minus-squaretheshatterstone54@feddit.uklinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 months agoWait, there’s GPL code there as well??? I’d heard of all the others but this ome kinda snuck under the radar with all the larger issues at play here
minus-squareSupermariofan67linkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 months agoThe article on theregister stated Also inside the uploaded source code was some GPL 2 source code, which renders the not-very-open WCL moot.
Winamp published their code as “open source”. Problem is…
On top of that, when told about the proprietary code, they deleted it from the repository thinking that was just the end if it. So they didn’t have any idea how git works either.
Wait, there’s GPL code there as well???
I’d heard of all the others but this ome kinda snuck under the radar with all the larger issues at play here
The article on theregister stated