18 ms·
Open sources can have a restrictive license, just because a project doesn't use WTFPL doesn't mean it's not open source.
by axitanull 3y ago
Open sources can have a restrictive license, just because a project doesn't use WTFPL doesn't mean it's not open source.
- dartos 3y agohttps://opensource.org/osd/ https://opensource.org/osd/ According to the open source initiative, that’s exactly what it means. MIT license is not copy left like GPL, but it’s open source. The llama license is not.