| |
| ▲ | perching_aix 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Reading the preamble there, and the parapgraph after that, I find what I said to be consistent what the page is saying there. | | |
| ▲ | steveklabnik 5 days ago | parent [-] | | > Any software is source-available in the broad sense as long as its source code is distributed along with it, even if the user has no legal rights to use, share, modify or even compile it. You have the legal right to use, share, modify, and compile, SQlite's source. If it were Source Available, you'd have the right to look at it, but do none of those things. | | |
| ▲ | perching_aix 5 days ago | parent [-] | | But not necessarily any of the other things! Big difference. Please read it again. | | |
| ▲ | steveklabnik 5 days ago | parent [-] | | That's your assertion, I am saying that it is not correct in the general way that people understand the terms "open source" and "source available." I doubt we're going to come to an agreement here, though, so I'll leave it at that. | | |
| ▲ | johnisgood 5 days ago | parent [-] | | > even if the user has no legal rights to use, share, modify or even compile it. Emphasis on even. It can have such rights, or not, the term may still apply regardless. |
|
|
|
|
|
