Technology

60052 readers

2977 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

243

draw.io no longer free and open source software since August 27, 2024 (github.com)

submitted 2 months ago by schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de to c/technology@lemmy.world

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 99 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

We fund the project entirely from sales of the Confluence integration.

Just to extend the conversation, the change implements one thing, it protects our revenue in the atlassian ecosystem.

What it does it protect the future development of the project by protecting the revenue. That's more useful to you than the license being fully open source.

The primary losers of this change is anyone wanting to integrate draw.io into the Atlassian ecosystem.

I mean this does seem kind of fair. I'm not familiar with Confluence and Atlassian but it seems something mostly aimed at corporations, I'm not sure of how common it's use is and how much is affected by this though.

I'm okay with something being 98% open source so they can survive on the extra 2%. And I much rather specific non competes for certain platforms then broad non-commercial clauses.

[–] supermarkus@feddit.org 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I mean this does seem kind of fair. I’m not familiar with Confluence and Atlassian but it seems something mostly aimed at corporations

He should just use AGPL then.

[–] vzq@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That’s substantially more restrictive than “Apache but you can’t sell it through this specific channel”, and it wouldn’t help this particular problem.

It’s not that the knock off extensions don’t want to share their code (they probably do).

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Atlassian could sell extensions, though, they would just need to comply with the AGPL. The AGPL means that the entire platform must comply with the AGPL, so proprietary platforms couldn't use it but in a fair "applies to everyone the same" and not "we don't like you individually" kind of way.

[–] davidjgraph@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago

It's a client-side app, AGPL doesn't work here.