you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

Not quite correct. The GPL (any other free software license I'm aware of) doesn't require you to accept changes from anyway. You can develop a piece of software and release it under the GPL without accepting public pull requests.

Free software licenses protect your rights to do certain things with the source code (the distinction from 'source available' software being exactly what is explicitly protected), but it doesn't require you to accept or entertain changes from anyone who wants to make them--essentially you can force them to fork the project in those cases.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 5 points 8 months ago

    Yeah you're actually right, I misinterpreted "contributions" as modifications. The shiny Open Source label should be applicable to any code that can be viewed, modified and redistributed freely. Even if the original project doesn't accept community PRs, it must be able to be forked - potentially by a party that would welcome public submissions to their fork.

  • source
  • parent