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

FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

colatkinson.site

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 407 posts

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#381

Post by z3t4 »

donatj wrote: post #343
cr0sh wrote: post #318

I find this to be yet another example of why the GPL (in general) was created, and why licenses like or similar to the BSD license are flawed. The way I see the GPL is that by modifying and publicly releasing the modified version of the binary, the payment for being able to do that is paid, at a minimum, in the code that should be released to accompany those changes. You want to use my code, and not pay me for it wit…

I honestly didn’t see the need for GPL until a project I had sunk a lot of time into contributing to changed their license from Apache to Proprietary and started charging more than I could possibly afford for a license. I feel tricked and betrayed, it has been a year and I am still upset. The whole thing feels like I got robbed. I donated my time to a project I thought was for the good of the community, turns out I w…

You can fork the latest Apache version of the project.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#382

Post by z3t4 »

mr__y wrote: post #206

Is there any copyright/licence specialist here? I've come up with an idea of having a free open software library that randomly displays offensive[0] messages full screen that comes with a BSD type licence with a clause that forbids removing/disabling that message. I assume that many developers or end-users[1] at home are perfectly fine with a messagebox popping up once a month with a "f## off" message, while any corp…

Dual licensing is fairly common. Then there's also nag messages that asks the user to pay. Then there's also "free for personal use".

The thing is though, that people don't pay unless they have to. In my experience nag screens are not that effective, but adding profanity might make it more effective :P If you make it "I CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY $10 FOR THIS SOFTWARE" or something, businesses will want to get rid of it.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#383

Post by chinesempire »

trasz wrote: post #347
chinesempire wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was GPL from the beginning, wouldn't it be a "ZFS on Linux" like situation? I don't think you can legally distribute GPL kernel modules for non GPL kernels. Even if you linked the module to the Darwin code, which is released under an OSS license (APSL), the two are not compatible and it's not clear if redistribution is fine (see "Darling: macOS compatibility for Linux" )

Sure you can. FreeBSD has been doing it for ages.

FreeBSD has a license compatible with GPL.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#FreeBSD

MacOS XNU doesn't.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apsl2

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#384

Post by gdfasfklshg4 »

eropple wrote: post #359
blablabla123 wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't mind if there was a "DONATE" button, I'd certainly donate 5$ or 10$. Under these circumstances even more since this driver is unique and several other drivers I use depend on it. (sshfs, perkeep, ext4fuse, ...) Probably these small but frequently used projects should also be supported by the FSF, at least in the *GPL case.

So this is an area of significant interest to me. I have researched this extensively, talked to a few dozen medium-to-large OSS maintainers, and have a project on the back burner about this. The only conclusion I've been able to draw is that literally every approach from OpenCollective to a PayPal link demonstrably does not work . Donations do not work. You have to give people something of value, even if nominal valu…

So release code under duel AGPL and commercial licences...

Most companies won't touch AGPL and will be very happy to pay for the commercial licence.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#385

Post by MayeulC »

Operyl wrote: post #257
MayeulC wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm starting to feel that September is slowing and it might end at some point, that in the end it really is related to the technology adoption life cycle[1]. If you look at the bell curve on that page, its integral is the technology penetration, that is a sigmoid: start slowly (initial period), accelerate (eternal september) for a while, and start to decrease the penetration speed. At some point, enough people will l…

What’s the link for [1]? I’m a bit curious now.

I am sorry, I meant to link the Wikipedia article for that topic: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_adoption_life_cyc...

It is not as complete as I'd like it to be, but it has some interesting bits and links.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#386

Post by DagAgren »

krageon wrote: post #302
DagAgren wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? Which part of the FOSS ideology or principles says that it's about doing things in your free time that you don't get paid for?

A movement is much larger than just the ideals or principles that have been written down. I was talking about it as it is, not as it claims to be.

Well, then, you claim FOSS is in a great place. Is it really?

SOME of it is, sure. The big successful projects.

But what about the rest of it?

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#387

Post by tambourine_man »

cerberusss wrote: post #377
tambourine_man wrote: post #177

I think the issue is lack of user interest. I’ve tried using FUSE for the Mac many times throughout the years, mostly for curl_fs and ssh_fs. Believe it or not, I’m not happy with the FTP alternatives on the Mac. Transmit is beautiful but buggy and lacks features such as general purpose SOCKS proxy. FileZilla is ugly as sin. Cyberduck is neither pretty nor feature packed. Although it got better recently, FUSE for the…

There's also Expandrive.

I briefly tried. Does it work well?

Also tried Transmit's mount feature, but wasn't very satisfied.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#388

Post by cerberusss »

tambourine_man wrote: post #387
cerberusss wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also Expandrive.

I briefly tried. Does it work well? Also tried Transmit's mount feature, but wasn't very satisfied.

I tried it many years ago. They changed so much in the meantime. But back then, the product was pretty good.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#389

Post by donatj »

z3t4 wrote: post #381
donatj wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly didn’t see the need for GPL until a project I had sunk a lot of time into contributing to changed their license from Apache to Proprietary and started charging more than I could possibly afford for a license. I feel tricked and betrayed, it has been a year and I am still upset. The whole thing feels like I got robbed. I donated my time to a project I thought was for the good of the community, turns out I w…

You can fork the latest Apache version of the project.

I’m actually still running the last Apache release. It’s a large project however and the thought of maintaining it entirely by myself is daunting.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#390

Post by eropple »

gdfasfklshg4 wrote: post #384
eropple wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So this is an area of significant interest to me. I have researched this extensively, talked to a few dozen medium-to-large OSS maintainers, and have a project on the back burner about this. The only conclusion I've been able to draw is that literally every approach from OpenCollective to a PayPal link demonstrably does not work . Donations do not work. You have to give people something of value, even if nominal valu…

So release code under duel AGPL and commercial licences... Most companies won't touch AGPL and will be very happy to pay for the commercial licence.

I agree that that's part of it!
Post reply on HN