marcussacana
commented
3 years ago no one give a fck
Closed EuphoricPenguin closed 3 years ago
marcussacana
commented
3 years ago no one give a fck
EuphoricPenguin
commented
3 years ago no one give a fck
That's the problem. I think the irony of explaining why open source matters in a thread on GitHub is enough to prove my point.
lllyasviel
commented
3 years ago Hi Penguin,
We will release the source codes for the previous online version style2paints v4 and this offline version style2paints v4.5 when the project SEPA (previously called style2paints v5) is released, at which point the life cycle of style2paints 4.X is end.
The currently available source code of style2paints v3 is released under Apache 2.0 lisence. Apart from source codes, note that the pretrained models are standalone materials and we preserve all rights of these model files.
Finally, the binary releases are too big for github release pages, which may cause network traffic banning.
Thank you for your attention and suggestions.
Best, Zhang
---Original--- From: @.> Date: Mon, May 24, 2021 08:44 AM To: @.>; Cc: @.***>; Subject: [lllyasviel/style2paints] No Source Code for V4 (#166)
I have something of a bone to pick with the maintainers of this repository. First, you create a project under the guise that it will remain free and open source. Second, you slowly develop the project until (at some point) you decide to turn your GitHub into a poor excuse for a landing page? You're not using the releases section to distribute your binaries; instead, you resort to a sketchy personal Google Drive. On top of this, you fail to make clear the distinction between the license (which allows commercial use) and your README (which has ambiguous language that effectively corrupts the original license and makes an entirely new one). Not only all of this, but you fail to even include the source code for your recent development? It's hardly open source when there isn't any source to be found. What is the function of your license when we can't even peek behind the curtain? I'd seriously re-consider the direction you're taking this project if you really want to convince people who are actually interested in true FOSS development that your project is worth their time. Otherwise, I kindly ask you to consider leaving GitHub, as this clearly has no place among projects that complete the bare minimum requirement of releasing source code.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
ghost
commented
2 years ago @EuphoricPenguin
First, you create a project under the guise that it will remain free and open source
Where is this stated by the developer?
Second, you slowly develop the project until (at some point) you decide to turn your GitHub into a poor excuse for a landing page?
This is so moronic even you need to ask it ask it as a question, because you know it's wrong.
You're not using the releases section to distribute your binaries; instead, you resort to a sketchy personal Google Drive.
And? Is this illegal? Does it matter where the binaries are hosted? Besides this is BETA SOFTWARE and NOT a release.
On top of this, you fail to make clear the distinction between the license (which allows commercial use) and your README (which has ambiguous language that effectively corrupts the original license and makes an entirely new one).
You clearly don't know how licenses work. You can license a given work as many ways as you want. You can license software as gpl and bsd at the same time. You don't know what a license is. You can't coruupt a license, you can only add other ones. The readme CANNOT detract from the license.
Not only all of this, but you fail to even include the source code for your recent development?
Yes, he can do what he wants. It's his repository not yours. Github is a place where you can host source code, not a place where script kiddies get to demand it. I have a bone to pick with YOU actually, for being so presumptuous. The developer is an actual scientific researcher. All his work is published peer reviewed academic journals. Before his work is published in a journal he can't release the source code because someone else will still the idea and try to publish first.
It's hardly open source when there isn't any source to be found.
There is, actually. Maybe learn how to view the contents of this repository.
What is the function of your license when we can't even peek behind the curtain?
Nobody is forcing you to use this software. Even if there is no function (for the BETA SOFTWARE) that doesn't matter.
I'd seriously re-consider the direction you're taking this project if you really want to convince people who are actually interested in true FOSS development that your project is worth their time.
Do you actually know the direction he is taking the project? (You don't.) Do you have any right to complain about how someone else uses thier time? (You don't.)
Otherwise, I kindly ask you to consider leaving GitHub, as this clearly has no place among projects that complete the bare minimum requirement of releasing source code.
I have something of a bone to pick with the maintainers of this repository. First, you create a project under the guise that it will remain free and open source. Second, you slowly develop the project until (at some point) you decide to turn your GitHub into a poor excuse for a landing page? You're not using the releases section to distribute your binaries; instead, you resort to a sketchy personal Google Drive. On top of this, you fail to make clear the distinction between the license (which allows commercial use) and your README (which has ambiguous language that effectively corrupts the original license and makes an entirely new one). Not only all of this, but you fail to even include the source code for your recent development? It's hardly open source when there isn't any source to be found. What is the function of your license when we can't even peek behind the curtain? I'd seriously re-consider the direction you're taking this project if you really want to convince people who are actually interested in true FOSS development that your project is worth their time. Otherwise, I kindly ask you to consider leaving GitHub, as this clearly has no place among projects that complete the bare minimum requirement of releasing source code.