• pmc@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 month ago

    They now require a non-free Bitwarden SDK component. That’s what this whole conversation is about.

      • asudoxOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        “You may not use this SDK to develop applications for use with software other than Bitwarden (including non-compatible implementations of Bitwarden) or to develop another SDK.”

        This is a condition when using their SDK. This is not considered a free (as in freedom) component because it violates freedom 0: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#four-freedoms

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      And the whole conversation is about a bug, not a change in direction…

      Update: Bitwarden posted to X this evening to reaffirm that it’s a “packaging bug” and that “Bitwarden remains committed to the open source licensing model.”

    • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Only the desktop client. And the response is that not being able to compile sans SDK is an issue they will resolve.

      I still think this is bad directionally, but we need to see what happens.