• jmp242@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I tend to prefer the GPL because I don’t know what good “source available” does for anyone beyond an audit. If I want to have someone fix a bug - I probably can’t with “source available”, and the overhead in figuring out if something is a use not liked by the vendor is an unnecessary headache for me.

    So… in this case, for me I’d treat a no-commercial use, source available, as functionally the same as a proprietary license like Microsofts.

    • lps2@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I take it you’re responding from the lens of using this software in a corporate setting? Otherwise there is functionally no difference in the license vs OSI-compatible open-source licenses unless I’m missing something big which very well could be the case

      • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, yes. I doubt there’s massive demand for HashiCorps tools for random home users.