❓ Support
H Hellas May 2, 2024

Open Source or Source Available?

Hello. On the front page of the project it is stated that Waterhole is open-source project

image.png

But license of the projects state it isn't open source project.
https://waterhole.dev/software-license

What am I missing?

8 ⁨8⁩ ⁨comments⁩
Answered by Toby Toby

Thanks for the constructive discussion @Hellas and @Stormlight. I agree that the ambiguity is probably unhelpful, so I've changed all mentions of "open source" to the more precise "source available" on the website and docs.

View Answer

⁨8⁩ ⁨Comments⁩

H Hellas May 2, 2024
In reply to Stormlight Stormlight

Open source does not mean free (monetary). It means one can modify and redistribute code and software.

In this case, the software is not open source but source-available. I just figured even the owner admitted it on Reddit.
Stormlight Stormlight May 2, 2024

But you are free (not in the monetary sense) to modify and redistribute Waterhole, you just have to abide by what's stated in the licence.

So, in the case of redistribution, you're free to do that, provided that you pay Waterhole for every licence that you give out.

Section 6 of the Waterhole licence
(e) a Licensee or Authorised User making the Software available to third parties via a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) offering, provided that a separate Production Licence is purchased for each separate project or separate client.
H Hellas May 2, 2024
In reply to Stormlight Stormlight

Then that is not the open source by definition.
https://opensource.org/osd

I understand what you want to say but that's "source-available" not "open source". Technically in literal sense open-source can mean that as well. But in the last 20-30 years, common meaning of open source is what I am claiming.

Basically, as Waterhole becomes more popular, more people will notice this. Heck some will even begin using it because they think it's "the open-source" not "an open-source"

Please check those two Wiki links few posts above which explain it well.

Here is the already discussed topic with the Waterhole dev.
https://www.reddit.com/r/laravel/comments/13q35as/waterhole_modern_laravelpowered_community_forum/jlcoq6j/
Stormlight Stormlight May 2, 2024
In reply to H Hellas

Yeah, I've seen that reddit thread before and I don't think what I've written above is incorrect. One of the commenters mentions this:

The above commenter is mistaking Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and Open Source. You can have open source software without giving up the copyright/licensing, which is what your product is.

and then Toby commented:

That's what I originally thought too. It would seem it depends where you look. The official Open Source definition requires freedom. This GNU article acknowledges that it is easy to misunderstand because of the natural meaning of the words "open source".

So I guess it's not very clearly defined as to what open source could mean.
Answer
Toby Toby Waterhole Founder May 2, 2024

Thanks for the constructive discussion @Hellas and @Stormlight. I agree that the ambiguity is probably unhelpful, so I've changed all mentions of "open source" to the more precise "source available" on the website and docs.
Comment Controls