Codecov

[elliotwutingfeng]

Like their parent company Sentry, Codecov is now licensed under BUSL. However, they claim to be "now open source".

Announcement: https://about.codecov.io/blog/codecov-is-now-open-source Hackernews thread (with responses from codecov staff): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36971490

[ssddanbrown]

Thanks @elliotwutingfeng, had not seen this! I'd probably combine this as an entry with #7, since it's the same folks doing the same shifty things. These combined make it pretty clear-cut they're being misleading with open source.

Another case where they're attempting to act as a "saviour" of open source by "evolving" the term (while better suiting their business interests). Some choice quotes from their employees:

The only way for businesses to release their core products under OSI-approved licenses is through a time delay such as the BSL.

I’ll tell you what’s abusive - people thinking they have the rights to other peoples work unconditionally, or that they can profiteer off it without contributing back.

We need to evolve our irrational views of idealism and find common ground that allows sustainability if we want open source to thrive.

That seems better to me than the current situation, and if in your view that is a change in the essence of open source, then yes, let's change open source. Change or die. [...] [disclosure: I'm Head of Open Source at Sentry, which owns Codecov.]

[ssddanbrown]

A follow up by Sentry due to the reaction of HN:

https://blog.sentry.io/lets-talk-about-open-source/

They double-down on wanting to redefine open source, specifically with this:

We hope to better define what sustainable open source models can look like, including semi-restrictive licenses like the BUSL. We don’t know what that means quite yet, but we’ll make sure that we share our ideas with the community in the future.

[elliotwutingfeng]

Codecov appears to have removed all misleading references to "open source" on the marketing/github repo docs now.

[illiliti]

Codecov no longer abuses open-source term for marketing purposes.

They double-down on wanting to redefine open source, specifically with this:

You can forward your concern to this issue: https://github.com/codecov/feedback/issues/48

[ssddanbrown]

Thanks @elliotwutingfeng and @illiliti. I've added Codecov as an addressed case: https://github.com/ssddanbrown/Open-Source-Confusion-Cases/blob/main/addressed/codecov.md I also added sentry as a non-addressed case: https://github.com/ssddanbrown/Open-Source-Confusion-Cases/blob/main/cases/sentry.md