Timeline for Can I give the software gratis but charge for the source (and still be FOSS)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22 at 21:09 | answer | added | Blacklight MG | timeline score: 3 | |
| Apr 25, 2023 at 6:20 | history | edited | MadHatter♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Jul 29, 2016 at 11:04 | vote | accept | Kii | ||
| Jul 9, 2016 at 13:05 | comment | added | RubberDuck | Prohibitive? Yes. Unnecessarily prohibitive? No. However, it's still, by definition, closed source. This isn't really the place to discuss it though. If you want to discuss about it, you might find some one in the site's chat room willing to. | |
| Jul 9, 2016 at 13:01 | comment | added | Kii | @RubberDuck : I don't agree with the term "closed" because it's accessible. Imagine paying 2$ just to have access to code source and future alterations. Would it be that prohibitive ? | |
| Jul 9, 2016 at 12:28 | comment | added | RubberDuck | Just FYI. The model you're proposing is called "Freeware" and was common in the 90s. Free to use, but closed source. | |
| Jul 8, 2016 at 17:08 | history | edited | Kii | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fix title
|
| Jul 8, 2016 at 14:22 | history | edited | Kii | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added explanations
|
| Jul 7, 2016 at 12:36 | answer | added | MadHatter♦ | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 10:21 | answer | added | lofidevops | timeline score: 11 | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 9:47 | review | First posts | |||
| Jul 7, 2016 at 9:57 | |||||
| Jul 7, 2016 at 9:46 | history | asked | Kii | CC BY-SA 3.0 |