bearblog

You're right, though it definitely fits into the ethos of don't overcomplicate things. https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/

It appears that Bear does not accept contributions[1] and the very few contributors it had in the past only contributed a trivial amount of code[2]. But you're right, relicensing requires the approval of all copyright holders, and in general there can be many. Of course many projects require the prospecting contributor sign a CLA where they relinquish their rights to the project in order to be able to contribute. Personally while I have signed some CLAs, such as the Go one where I retained my rights, I'd never sign one which required me to give away my copyright rights, precisely so they wouldn't be able to do a rugpull on me. I believe that copyright law is the biggest weapon one has against open source rugpulls and one should not give it away. [1] https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/blob/master/CONTR... [2] https://github.com/He

https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/graphs/contributo... paints a different story. Looks more like bus factor 1 + hopium.

> No, the license disallows use of the software for seeing up a multi-user blogging system as a paid service This is incorrect. https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/blob/master/LICEN... > You may not provide the Software as a hosted or managed service that offers users access to substantial features or functionality. It does not make the distinction around a financial transaction.

Does anyone know why this says "No javascript, no stylesheets, no trackers. Just your words." But when you look at the github repo here: https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog It says the repo is 40% CSS and 31% Javascript? Am I misinterpreting what this means in this context?

The updated license in the BearBlog repo (https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/blob/master/LICEN...) doesn't seem to match the Elastic License very well (https://www.elastic.co/licensing/elastic-license). Have I missed a different source for the license text?

>You may not provide the Software as a hosted or managed service that offers users access to substantial features or functionality. IANAL, but does the above limitation prevent users from hosting bear for their own (or your company’s own) needs? If so, doesn’t that defeat the whole reason why it’s MIT licensed. https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/blob/master/LICEN...

This is a confusing claim. Are you saying the chosen license (<https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/blob/998e87263248...>) makes the software free to use to offer (e.g. gratis) "hosted or managed service[s]" so long as one does not sell the services? This is trivially confirmed not to be true. It prohibits all use of the software to provide services, not just a prohibition on selling them.

Quite a few people commenting here are having problems with it in the case of Bearblog though, including some pretty wild accusations. And lets be real here: https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/graphs/contributo... Looking at the details of that, the only two (small) substantial code changes from other people are "User can delete their own account" from 2020, and "Use cloudflare online dns api to perform domain check" from 2021.

> It feels mostly in the spirit of FOSS to me From the license at <https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/blob/998e87263248...>: "You may not provide the Software as a hosted or managed service that offers users access to substantial features or functionality" Given that the exclusive purpose of the Software in question is to implement a managed service for its users' hosting needs, I'm having trouble understanding how anyone could take the position that this is "mostly in the spirit of FOSS". The license might as well say, "You just can't use this."

> This license is almost identical to the MIT license but with the stipulation that the software cannot be provided as a hosted or managed service Note that while the original change was an additional clause to the MIT license, it was quickly changed to something completely different.[0] Since it no longer permits sublicensing and restricts "remov[ing] or obscur[ing] any licensing, copyright, or other notices in the Software," I believe it's closer to GPL now? [0]: https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/commit/89c3f346ef...

What I find amusing is that it's built on top of Django and of course uses a few other dependencies[0], and without them the project wouldn't even exist... 0. https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/blob/master/requi...

Seems to be self-hostable: here is the code, it is even MIT licensed: https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/

Could be in part bot activity. I've seen a couple other weird things rise up on here. The blogging platform for this one is interesting, if you follow the rabbit hole a bit you'll find e.g. https://herman.bearblog.dev/building-software-to-last-foreve... I don't see that many posts, but it appears to have some interesting traffic on it at present. Worth holding on to perhaps? https://github.com/HermanMartinus/bearblog/