search

plotwist-app / plotwist

Organizing movies and series has never been easier.
https://plotwist.app
Other
293 stars 17 forks source link

Docs: Open Source License #207

Closed BruceBufferOverflow closed 1 week ago

BruceBufferOverflow commented 4 months ago

I noticed that the repository currently does not have a defined license. Having a clear license informs contributors about how they can use and modify this open-source project. Without a license, the default assumption is that a project is not open source and others do not have permission to use or modify the code. Could licensing please be clarified for this project?

With open-source intentions, I would suggest the ever-popular MIT open-source license or, if it is preferred, a BSD Clause which is more restrictive but would require attribution in the source code.

linear[bot] commented 4 months ago

PLO-67 Docs: Open Source License

BruceBufferOverflow commented 4 months ago

A CC license is a poor choice, as Creative Commons licenses are not designed for software or code, according to Creative Commons themselves, but rather are designed for creative works like literature, art, and music. These licenses lack the specific provisions and language that address the unique aspects of software development.

Using a Creative Commons license for software can also create compatibility issues with other software projects that use standard open-source licenses. This can hinder collaboration as the terms of Creative Commons licenses often do not align well with those of traditional software/code licenses.

Creative Commons licenses are also not considered open-source licenses, which is counter to the open-source tag and description of the project: "Open-source easy management and reviews of your movies, series and animes." In the words of the Open Source Hardware Association: Creative Commons is strictly incompatible with open source as these licenses carry restrictions against commercial and other use cases (Source: oshwa.org: cc-oshw).

The Creative Commons organization directs developers to use licenses that are specifically designed for code and software, such as those approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI). This recommendation is based on Creative Commons' understanding of the limitations and inappropriateness of their licenses for software applications.

Additionally, restrictive licenses may lead to reluctance among developers to contribute to or use the software. For sake of standards and the future of the project, I would recommend that this software's license be reconsidered with one specifically tailored toward code and software rather than art and creative material, as well as with further permissibility for the sake of fostering collaboration and aligning with open source - as is the spirit of the dozens of dependencies this project relies on to exist. Otherwise, developers would have no incentive to contribute if they are too restricted in the uses of this open source software.