When a FOSS project closes itself off this way, the proper response is to treat it as abandoned and continue development from the last-good version with source available. In particular, MacPorts should not be distributing the binary-only versions. Total disengagement.
FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
11–20 of 407 posts
Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
#12Someone should fork it and apply to Apple as a new kext.
Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
#13It is buried in the footnotes of the post, but the ultimate reason behind going closed source is that Google built their enterprise GDrive syncing client for mac off a fork of osxfuse. The original author of osxfuse feels entitled to some compensation for that and is doing his damnedest to make it happen.
Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
#14This is why permissive licenses are bad news for users.
Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
#15IIRC, FUSE is also required for VeraCrypt to function. So now the source code of this library (module? whatever) that's used by popular encryption software won't be available for public scrutiny. Amazing.
The author is, of course, completely within their rights to stop publishing the source code of their software, but this is a real pity.
The way to go would be for members of the FOSS community to fork the last version of the source code that was published and continue development, but I don't know who (if anyone) will step up and take responsibility.
This also leads to fragmentation, were now you have two popular forks of the same thing which may not be compatible with each other. Sigh.
Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
#16This is why permissive licenses are bad news for users.
Amen. People have a very hard time to understand this: we don't need concessions, we don't need benevolence: we need rights.
Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
#17It is buried in the footnotes of the post, but the ultimate reason behind going closed source is that Google built their enterprise GDrive syncing client for mac off a fork of osxfuse. The original author of osxfuse feels entitled to some compensation for that and is doing his damnedest to make it happen.
the footnote doesn't say that's the reason osxfuse went close source
Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
#18Let's all wait for BSD license apologists to insist true freedom is the freedom to blackmail your users.
Props to the OS Xfuse maintainer, he does deserve a fat payout so begrudging him. Still, it paints the clear picture of how BSD is an inferior license when it comes to freedom for users.
Maybe this comment is too slashdot 2006 era, but still, licenses matter.
Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
#19It is buried in the footnotes of the post, but the ultimate reason behind going closed source is that Google built their enterprise GDrive syncing client for mac off a fork of osxfuse. The original author of osxfuse feels entitled to some compensation for that and is doing his damnedest to make it happen.
[deleted]
Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source
#20Let's all wait for BSD license apologists to insist true freedom is the freedom to blackmail your users. Props to the OS Xfuse maintainer, he does deserve a fat payout so begrudging him. Still, it paints the clear picture of how BSD is an inferior license when it comes to freedom for users. Maybe this comment is too slashdot 2006 era, but still, licenses matter.
Correct me if I'm misinformed, but I don't see your point? The original author of code is always free to stop publishing their software as FOSS, regardless of which license they use, as long as they don't try and stop the re-distribution and forking of existing FOSS releases?