Gitea, took control away from community and gave it to a for profit organization. Forgejo was born
Right. VBA or this may not be the best tools for the job but when IT restricts what can be used then VBA or excel python could be great examples of Shadow IT.
Python 3.13 is adding support for removing GIL, via PEP 703
The article mentions that the letter indicated intent to petition with the USPTO to cancel the Javascript trademark due to abandonment. Hopefully that is successful since that seems to be the best outcome short of Oracle willingly forfeiting it.
I really like that it is a static website being updated and built on a schedule from github actions.
I use my IDE for basic things, but anything more involved i use git directly. It's really not as intimidating as it's made out to be. I'm no expert by any means but i know enough to get around and read the docs when i need help
Open source is generally understood as libre, and an OSI approved license.
I think you're thinking of source-available.
Additional reading: https://news.itsfoss.com/open-source-source-available/
Anyway, thanks for the list!
Umami has a free tier of their cloud hosting.
From what i can tell there are no transaction fees for sponsorships from personal accounts, and organizations pay 6% (or 3% if invoicing). (Source)
Is there something else I'm not seeing?
The whole idea to check the donations came from stumbling upon this post which discussed costs per user. Even $1/mo is quite a bit more than the average user cost. So $2 isn't so measly when putting it into that perspective!
Hi all, I'm relatively new to this instance but reading through the instance docs I found: >Donations are currently made using snowe’s github sponsors page. If you get another place to donate that is not this it is fake and should be reported to us.
Going to the sponsor page we see the following goal: > @snowe2010's goal is to earn $200 per month > > pay for our 📫 SendGrid Account: $20 a month 💻 Vultr VPS for prod and beta sites: Prod is $115-130 a month, beta is $6-10 a month 👩🏼 Paying our admins and devops any amount ◀️ Upgrade tailscale membership: $6-? dollars a month (depends on number of users) Add in better server infrastructure including paid account for Pulsetic and Graphana. Add in better server backups, and be able to expand the team so that it's not so small.
Currently only 30% of the goal to break-even is being met. Please consider setting up a sponsorship, even if it just $1. Decentralized platforms are great but they still have real costs behind the scenes.
Note: I'm not affiliated with the admin team, just sharing something I noticed.
In fairness websites from 2000-2004 werent all that better
Were there better ways to make a site? Absolutely, but it is much less wild than if you told me that this happened last week. Plus i would hope they were just churning out websites for cheap since a lot places didn't have a website, or they used geocities/similar
The difference is that commercialization is inherent with a free (libre) open source license. Whereas going against the intent, but still legally gray area, is imo malicious compliance because it circumvents what the license was intended to solve in the first place.
But that's all i really care to add to this convo, since my initial comment my intent was just to say that the AGPLv3 license does not stop corporations from getting free stuff and being able to charge for it-- especially documentation. Have a good one
No. I said even if they don't maliciously comply with the license [by making the open sourced code unusable without the backend code or some other means outside of scope of this conversation] then they can charge for it.
The malicous part is in brackets in the above paragraph. The license is an OSI approved license that allows commercialization, it would be stupid for me to call that malicious.
Nothing. The context of this comment thread is "fuck corporations" and then proposing AGPL to solve that. I am merely pointing out that if their goal is to have a non-commercial license then AGPL doesn't solve that, which is why i mention they can charge for their services with AGPL.
AGPL is the most restrictive OSI approved license (of the commonly used ones), but it is still a free (libre) open source license. My understanding is just that the AGPL believes in the end-users rights to access to the open source needs to be maintained and therefore places some burden to make the source available if it it's being run on a server.
In general, companies run away from anything AGPL, however, some companies will get creative with it and make their source available but in a way that is useless without the backend. And even if they don't maliciously comply with the license, they can still charge for their services.
As far as documentation goes, you could license documentation under AGPL, and people could still charge for it. It would just need to be kept available for end-users which i don't think is really a barrier to use for documentation.
It would be much more customer and developer friendly to allow linking a service portal instead of providing a phone number. I would go insane if a user called me directly every time one of my projects had a bug or some perceived (non)issue. No, that's not how this works.
Kebab or snake for ease of parsing through them.
There is an option to disable it permanently. Otherwise it is once a year and easily dismissed
It's once per year, easily dismissed, and can be permanently disabled. Seems entirely reasonable for a piece of free software that someone would use everyday