Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Winamp Legacy player source code

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 345 posts

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#12

Post by eminence32 »

Open sourcing is always good, because maybe you can learn some things by reading it. Also, Winamp Legacy is a fairly important piece of software, so having an archive of its source is a great thing.

But the restrictions on the source are interesting. To quote the license file:

    * No Distribution of Modified Versions: You may not distribute modified versions of the software, whether in source or binary form.
    * No Forking: You may not create, maintain, or distribute a forked version of the software.
    * Official Distribution: Only the maintainers of the official repository are allowed to distribute the software and its modifications.
I'm guessing the "No Forking" clause means I can't release my own media player based on this source code, but the language is curious because they explicitly welcome contributions and for a project hosted on Github the standard way to do that is to "fork" the project into your own account.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#13

Post by 0x0 »

ndiddy wrote: post #7

I'm curious how they expect people to contribute to the project. Section 4 of the license says "Contribution to Project: You are encouraged to contribute improvements, enhancements, and bug fixes back to the project. Contributions must be submitted to the official repository and will be reviewed and incorporated at the discretion of the maintainers." However, the restrictions in Section 5 ban forking the code or dist…

I guess you could format a diff patch file locally and paste it as a text comment in an issue in their repo...? :P

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#14

Post by chrisfinazzo »

ndiddy wrote: post #7

I'm curious how they expect people to contribute to the project. Section 4 of the license says "Contribution to Project: You are encouraged to contribute improvements, enhancements, and bug fixes back to the project. Contributions must be submitted to the official repository and will be reviewed and incorporated at the discretion of the maintainers." However, the restrictions in Section 5 ban forking the code or dist…

As @rollcat said, I suspect this means that people can contribute modifications, but that they cannot be distributed outside of the official sources.

So, while you can send a patch to add a feature, you couldn't release that modified version on its own.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#15

Post by lucideer »

"source code is open" implies "open source", and the License refers to itself as a "copyleft" license, but it's a newly minted license - IANAL does anyone know if this is open source or another Elastic type situation?

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#16

Post by Spivak »

ndiddy wrote: post #7

I'm curious how they expect people to contribute to the project. Section 4 of the license says "Contribution to Project: You are encouraged to contribute improvements, enhancements, and bug fixes back to the project. Contributions must be submitted to the official repository and will be reviewed and incorporated at the discretion of the maintainers." However, the restrictions in Section 5 ban forking the code or dist…

Because there are two definitions of fork. One is the button that says fork in Github which is really cloning the repo into your account. Then there is fork meaning "fork the project" which is actively developing and distributing an alternative lineage of the project, likely under a different name. You can use Github's PR workflow, it's fine.

Github is the one with the unfortunate naming here that goes against the already established meaning of fork. It really should be clone.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#17

Post by proto-n »

eminence32 wrote: post #12

Open sourcing is always good, because maybe you can learn some things by reading it. Also, Winamp Legacy is a fairly important piece of software, so having an archive of its source is a great thing. But the restrictions on the source are interesting. To quote the license file: * No Distribution of Modified Versions: You may not distribute modified versions of the software, whether in source or binary form. * No Forki…

I'm not sure forking the repo would create a forked version of the 'software' if the fork's sole purpose is to develop a pull request. But I guess it's somewhat ambiguous langauge, and better safe then sorry when it comes to lawyers (which I'm not).

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#19

Post by Novosell »

ndiddy wrote: post #7

I'm curious how they expect people to contribute to the project. Section 4 of the license says "Contribution to Project: You are encouraged to contribute improvements, enhancements, and bug fixes back to the project. Contributions must be submitted to the official repository and will be reviewed and incorporated at the discretion of the maintainers." However, the restrictions in Section 5 ban forking the code or dist…

The Github ToS gives users the right to fork any public repos.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#20

Post by justinclift »

stefanos82 wrote: post #4
timvdalen wrote: post #2

What happened here? Did someone buy the rights to the original Winamp? The linked site doesn't look very related to the original Winamp.

Here you go https://about.winamp.com/press/article/winamp-open-source-co...

Oh great. Yet another bunch of people trying to claim their not-at-all-Open-Source custom license is actually Open Source.

Hopefully one day they'll actually Open Source it. I mean, they're trying to pretend it is, so why not just do it properly?

Post reply on HN