Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think this is relevant:

https://github.com/orgs/organicmaps/discussions/9837

https://web.archive.org/web/20250815050441/https://github.co...

In the discussion you link, biodranik tries to say that it was illegal for those with access to the repo to dispose of the open-source code because that open-source code had not be published. I don't think this is right:

Open-source does not mean at all that the code has to be public. It can be private to a community. But whoever has access to that code is allowed, under the open-source licence, to dispose of it under the terms of the licence. My understanding is that this is what happened with the fork of Organic Maps. And it is pretty clearly explained in the codeberg discussion you linked.

> an allegation that the CoMaps project is already tainted with code to which is expressly doesn't have license

I don't think it says that CoMaps doesn't have the licence. It says that whoever forked the codebase did not have permission by some of the founders of Organic Maps. That's very different: the licence doesn't say that you must ask permission to the founders; it says that the code can be used under the terms of the licence. A fork part of those terms.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: