• solrize@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    6 months ago

    Even if they accept patches, contributing still sounds like a bad deal. It’s free labor for some company. FOSS at minimum means the right to fork, precisely what “source available” seeks to deny.

    Leaving aside the question of winamp vs comparable programs, does anyone even care about desktop music players any more? I’m a throwback and use command line players, but I thought the cool kids these days use phones for stuff like that.

    I understand there is some technical obstacle to porting Rockbox to Android, but idk what it is and haven’t tried to look into it.

    • sorghum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      6 months ago

      I look at ‘source available’ software as the right to review the code yourself to ensure there’s no malicious behavior, not for community development.

      • solrize@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        You mean if you build it yourself? I guess that is something, but it is still conceivable to sneak stuff in. Look at that xzlib backdoor from a few weeks ago.

      • xavier666
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Is there any way to verify that the product in deployment is built from the same source? I’m guessing hash values but I still think it can be faked.