| |
| ▲ | Zambyte 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > Prevent the Defold software from being commercialised by a third-party. Why? | | |
| ▲ | dahart 4 days ago | parent [-] | | It says why multiple times, right on the page parent linked to. They want Defold to be free to use, they are trying to guarantee it’s always available to developers free of charge, and that the source remains always available. Why do you ask? | | |
| ▲ | Zambyte 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I ask why because tons of other software achieve being free to use, free of charge, without preventing the software from being commercialised by a third-party. Why do they feel the need to prevent their software from being commercialized? The only reasonable answer seems to be jealousy. | | |
| ▲ | dahart 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It seems like you’re making assumptions. But who cares, what business is it of ours if they want to keep Defold free? Would you rather they charge for it? Proprietary and disallowing others to commercialize your software is the law’s default, and a perfectly valid choice. What does it matter why? Why are you feeling the need to judge? |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | nazgulsenpai 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | ≥Support the open source community and the use of open licenses. Tbh I'm a little more confused after reading this | | |
| ▲ | britzl 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The main repository (github.com/defold/defold) is the only one with the Defold License (ie the modified Apache license). There's also around 80 or so MIT licensed repositories with Defold engine plugins for things such as analytics, monetization, ads, attribution, game servers as well as tools such as Spine, Tiled, Rive etc. | |
| ▲ | seba_dos1 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | They called Defold "open source" at the beginning and only changed the wording later when people started reacting, so this could be an artifact left from that. |
|
|
