search

ssddanbrown / Open-Source-Confusion-Cases

A list of cases where open source licenses are misrepresented or where "Open Source" is used in a non-open-source-definition adhering manner.
MIT License
127 stars 1 forks source link

Directus #48

Open ssddanbrown opened 1 month ago

ssddanbrown commented 1 month ago

Changed to BUSL April 2023: https://github.com/directus/directus/pull/18330 Readme advertises as open source: https://github.com/directus/directus/blob/e469b49583440f068393fe4f0e093ba317afe089/directus/readme.md?plain=1#L9 Docs advertise as open source:

Built entirely in Typescript, primarily on Node.js and Vue.js, Directus is 100% open-source, modular and extensible [...]

Open — Directus Core is open source, with no obfuscated or cloud-only code.

Somewhat related post in regard to them changing their license here (including in video), but a lot of abstract cake talk without if they see themselves as actually open source.

Some very relevant comments from an author on the term: https://github.com/directus/directus/discussions/17977#discussioncomment-5481425

Also found this post with some quite misunderstood/misleading arguments made by the author: https://github.com/directus/directus/issues/19420#issuecomment-1677583266

Might be enough to add it already without getting feedback ourselves .