Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
1–10 of 24 posts
Re: Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
#2Open source on github with a paid subscription. Is this something new?
Re: Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
#3From http://docs.http-prompt.com/en/latest/contributor-guide.html:
> Fork is a term invented by GitHub.
No, it is not.
Also, do I get royalties for my contributions to this open source project? Since you're literally selling other people a gated license to the code I contribute, I'm wondering how this works from a legal perspective.
Re: Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
#4From http://docs.http-prompt.com/en/latest/contributor-guide.html : > Fork is a term invented by GitHub. No, it is not. Also, do I get royalties for my contributions to this open source project? Since you're literally selling other people a gated license to the code I contribute, I'm wondering how this works from a legal perspective.
> Fork is a term invented by GitHub.
Amazing, isn't it? With the internet, we have this wealth of knowledge at our fingertips and yet so few use it.
Re: Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
#5Open source on github with a paid subscription. Is this something new?
Open Source Software (OSS) is not the same as Free Software (FS). And even with Free Software, the free doesn't mean necessarily Gratis. There is something called Free Open Source Software (FOSS), but even there the Free doesn't need to mean Gratis. Either way, I don't think there is something wrong with having a paid service, while still having your code being OSS. It means that you can access the code, and use the product for free, but you might want to pay for the services the company might offer on top of it. Not that I know if that's the case here, but you know, it's possible.
Re: Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
#6Open source on github with a paid subscription. Is this something new?
Gratis != open-source != free (free is about liberty, not price)
Any combination of these 3 principles is possible with the right license
Re: Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
#7From http://docs.http-prompt.com/en/latest/contributor-guide.html : > Fork is a term invented by GitHub. No, it is not. Also, do I get royalties for my contributions to this open source project? Since you're literally selling other people a gated license to the code I contribute, I'm wondering how this works from a legal perspective.
Doing that without a Contributors License Agreement seems at the very least iffy. (AGPL + commercial isn't exactly unusual, but normally there is a CLA involved)
Re: Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
#8From http://docs.http-prompt.com/en/latest/contributor-guide.html : > Fork is a term invented by GitHub. No, it is not. Also, do I get royalties for my contributions to this open source project? Since you're literally selling other people a gated license to the code I contribute, I'm wondering how this works from a legal perspective.
> Fork is a term invented by GitHub. Amazing, isn't it? With the internet, we have this wealth of knowledge at our fingertips and yet so few use it.
> With the internet, we have this wealth of knowledge at our fingertips and yet so few use it.
And yet, you still can't believe everything you read on the Internet.
Re: Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
#9Open source on github with a paid subscription. Is this something new?
Gratis != open-source != free (free is about liberty, not price) Any combination of these 3 principles is possible with the right license
Instead of always commenting to resolve the ambiguity around the 'Free' in FOSS I feel we should instead use a different term. Say 'Modifiable'/'Liberal' Open Source Software ?
Re: Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gratis != open-source != free (free is about liberty, not price) Any combination of these 3 principles is possible with the right license
Instead of always commenting to resolve the ambiguity around the 'Free' in FOSS I feel we should instead use a different term. Say 'Modifiable'/'Liberal' Open Source Software ?
'Libre' may be the term you're looking for