Still broken, @cannikin. Nobody's on board to investigate, much less fix it. Please do dig in

OpenFaaS is hosted by OpenFaaS Ltd (registration: 11076587), a company which also offers commercial services, homepage sponsorships, and support.

On the “lows” side, I’d say the worst thing was the impact of not being present enough for my family. I was working a full-time job and doing faastRuby on nights and weekends. Here I want to give a big shout out to my wife. She supported me through this and didn’t cut my head off in the process.

markdown-it is the result of the decision of the authors who contributed to 99% of the Remarkable code to move to a project with the same authorship but new leadership (Vitaly and Alex). It's not a fork.

release 0.0.1 after around 5 years.

It almost feels unreal finishing up this release post. It’s been so long!

After around 3 years of silence, Trailblazer is back with its 2.1 release.

Licensed under the LGPLv3 license. We also offer a commercial-friendly license.

This project is provided by the LinkedIn Presentation Infrastructure team as open source software

Testing your open source projects will always be free! Seriously. Always. We like to think of it as our way of giving back to a community that connects so many people.

Our mission is to allow people to make money via educational efforts and to dedicate the rest of their time to creating great open source products.

We’re now relaunching PRO, but instead of a paid chat and (never existing) paid documentation, your team gets access to paid gems, our visual editor for workflows, and a commercial license.

And yes, at TRB GmbH, we do pay people to work on OSS

To tell you the truth, the new tracing feature was the original reason why I decided to write 2.1 and make you sit and wait in agony for years. Nevertheless, tracing is simply blowing my mind. I can’t count how many hours and angering rushs of adrenaline I’ve saved since the introduction of the wtf? method and its helpful higher-level stack trace.

note that TRB source code modifications are not proprietary

Trailblazer (TRB) is an Open-Source project. Since we want to keep it that way, we decided to raise awareness for the “cost” of our work - providing new versions and features is incredibly time-consuming for us, but we love what we do.

This creates a win-win situation, you as the user have your peace of mind, and we can continue working with your funds.

Take 3, Previously attempted in 2012 (#8189) and 2015 (#19709). This new version uses ActiveModel Attributes API.

Another recent attempt: #35246

Sorry for the delay, life got in the way. I should have some time to pick this up again next week.

Great thanks to Blake Education for giving us the freedom and time to develop this project in 2013 while working on their project.

This gives them a slight edge but that’s nothing substantial because those fixes eventually reach Ubuntu.

But all of these attempts misunderstand why the Open Source ecosystem is successful as a whole. The ecosystem of fairly standard licenses provides a level playing field that allows collaboration with low friction, and produces massive value for everyone involved – both to those that contribute and to those that don't. It is not without problems (there are many essential but unsexy projects that are struggling with funding), but introducing more friction won't improve the success of this ecosystem – it will just lead to some parts of the ecosystem to break off.

Part of me thinks that open source can be more rewarding to the creators/contributors. But maybe the real contribution is the permanent addition to the tools available to humanity, and if you have the wits, you can make a decent business out of it without tainting open source.

Selling proprietary software is difficult when there is so much gratis Open Source software around.

For a sufficiently successful and industry-relevant open source project, it's possible for the main developers to earn a living e.g. by selling related consulting services.

It turns out that creating and using Free Software is not just good to individuals, but for businesses as well, for example by building upon publicly available components and by collaborating shared software. The term Open Source is a business-friendly rebranding of the Free Software concept. This line of thought was also widely successful, e.g. Firefox/Mozilla was an open sourcing of Netscape software.

This is a store we can’t audit, which contains software nobody can patch. If we can’t fix or modify software, open-source or not, it provides the same limitations as proprietary software.

Although it is open-source, Snap on the other hand, only works with the Ubuntu Store. Nobody knows how to make a Snap Store and nobody can. The Snap client is designed to work with only one source, following a protocol which isn’t open, and using only one authentication system. Snapd is nothing on its own, it can only work with the Ubuntu Store.

At work, I cannot maintain this project. At home, I'd rather spend time with my children and on projects that I'm currently passionate about.

unlike a traditional computer, a blockchain computer can offer strong trust guarantees, rooted in the mathematical and game-theoretic properties of the system. A user or developer can trust that a piece of code running on a blockchain computer will continue to behave as designed, even if individual participants in the network change their motivations or try to subvert the system. This means that the control of a blockchain computer can be placed in the hands of a community

Augmented Steam is an open source project. You can verify the code for yourself, help us improve it or create your very own version.

👍 Upvote issue #204 if you want to see it land faster.

Would you work for free? It is a simple but loaded question that requires additional context. Is it working to help a friend do something? Is it work that you would enjoy? Does the act of working for free give you some level of satisfaction? Your gut reaction to the question may have been a hearty, “No,” but many people volunteer for a variety of things all the time, so people will work for free when there is something in it they enjoy.

Open source is fundamentally good with the transparency and flexibility it brings; however, as our reliance on it goes up, the overall investment back into the ecosystem has not. It can be easy to take for granted the time and effort many developers put into open source projects. Yet it is with their time and effort that we often save our own.

These developers are not greedy or selfish for wanting funding for their projects. To the contrary, they want funding to keep the project alive. A person has to eat, after all. Funding the project is a means of changing the maintainer’s timeshare—allowing themselves to put time into the project that otherwise would be used for other employment. There is only so much time in a day that a person can otherwise give.

Funding should not be a struggle for open source projects. We embrace open source into our codebases frequently but have yet to fully embrace the idea that funding it actually helps us too. The bug fixes and feature requests need to be implemented, tested, and reviewed by someone who themselves can only put so much time into the project.

Chromium is a very popular web browser, the fully open source counterpart to Google Chrome.

I don’t think he implies that, he didn’t mentioned FOSS or non-FOSS. Third party doesn’t refer to licensing, only to who provides it.

wouldn’t that « lesser » the FOSS effort towards desktop app’s ?

Snap gets rid of dependency mess. Good. Snap offers in one place FOSS and proprietary app’s. Here I am suspicious. It may be an advantage for a commercial app-store and for some users. But this advantage may lead to loss of comfort and flexibility for the many users that rely first on FOSS.

If it is powerful and reliable, that means it serves them better.

You can also purchase a Nextcould hosting service, which on one hand may not seem any different from giving your photos over to Google or Apple, but there's a significant difference: Nextcloud storage is demonstrably encrypted, with source code to prove it.

Following the model of open-source software, we can enter our ideas and expressions into public discourse

Our team is building open source community tools and Svelte fits our identity as an independent labor of love with an organic community.

With some frameworks, you may find your needs at odds with the enterprise-level goals of a megacorp owner, and you may both benefit and sometimes suffer from their web-scale engineering. Svelte’s future does not depend on the continued delivery of business value to one company, and its direction is shaped in public by volunteers.

Better community building: At the moment, MDN content edits are published instantly, and then reverted if they are not suitable. This is really bad for community relations. With a PR model, we can review edits and provide feedback, actually having conversations with contributors, building relationships with them, and helping them learn.

There are actually 3 other libraries that implements material in svelte, i hope this to become the community favorite because using MDC underneath it implements correctly Material guidelines.

If you are a developer and would like to fork, modify and/or contribute to this extesion, then this section is for you.

It is open to the community to help set its direction.

In Rust, we use the "No New Rationale" rule, which says that the decision to merge (or not merge) an RFC is based only on rationale that was presented and debated in public. This avoids accidents where the community feels blindsided by a decision.

I'd like to go with an RFC-based governance model (similar to Rust, Ember or Swift) that looks something like this: new features go through a public RFC that describes the motivation for the change, a detailed implementation description, a description on how to document or teach the change (for kpm, that would roughly be focused around how it affected the usual workflows), any drawbacks or alternatives, and any open questions that should be addressed before merging. the change is discussed until all of the relevant arguments have been debated and the arguments are starting to become repetitive (they "reach a steady state") the RFC goes into "final comment period", allowing people who weren't paying close attention to every proposal to have a chance to weigh in with new arguments. assuming no new arguments are presented, the RFC is merged by consensus of the core team and the feature is implemented. All changes, regardless of their source, go through this process, giving active community members who aren't on the core team an opportunity to participate directly in the future direction of the project. (both because of proposals they submit and ones from the core team that they contribute to)

So I propose having the repo in place, and using it for targeted proposals where we really want feedback from early users, and hold off formalising anything more until early next year, as you said.

Express - 19 $ 🏃‍♀️ Skip the Review Queue 🕒 Published in 3 days 💌 Full Customer Support 💚 Support the team

Tunnelgram is fully open source (server and client) and uses the Tunnelwire Encryption Scheme, so you can see all of the code it's built on.

As a result, it is no longer open source.

Free to accessFree to reuseFree to reviseFree to remixFree to redistributeThe question becomes, then, what is the relationship between these additional capabilities and what we know about effective teaching and learning? How can we extend, revise, and remix our pedagogy based on these additional capabilities?

Over time Adam, Surplus' creator, had less and less time to spend on the project and I decided to take my own shot.

But maybe this PR should still be merged until he finds time for that?

Sorry this sat for so long!

The initials fa in the class refer to Font Awesome, an open- source set of icons created by Dave Gandy,23 which further links this project to the open- source community and its ethos of collaboration. Font Awesome gives the community icons for making professional- grade web apps, rendering artifacts and objects legible in the contemporary web design ecology

Open Source flutter Apps permits you to make lovely native apps on iOS and Android from one codebase. The most goal of this repository is to seek out free open supply apps and begin contributive. Be at liberty to contribute to the list, any suggestions square measure welcome!

Stallman has also stated that considering the practical advantages of free software is like considering the practical advantages of not being handcuffed, in that it is not necessary for an individual to consider practical reasons in order to realize that being handcuffed is undesirable in itself.

GitLab is moving all development for both GitLab Community Edition and Enterprise Edition into a single codebase. The current gitlab-ce repository will become a read-only mirror, without any proprietary code. All development is moved to the current gitlab-ee repository, which we will rename to just gitlab in the coming weeks. As part of this migration, issues will be moved to the current gitlab-ee project.

How does the licensing work in this new setup? Everything in the ee/ directory is proprietary. Everything else is free and open source software. If your merge request does not change anything in the ee/ directory, the process of contributing changes is the same as when using the gitlab-ce repository.

"Other office suites are focusing on the 'power user' which is a valuable market, for sure, but the real power and range for an open-source office suite alternative is the vast majority which is the 'rest of us. Sometimes we all forget how empowering open source is to the entire world."

This is very irresponsible of them, with respect to the number of downloads. They should finally realize this and just redirect people to LO. Continuing like this hurts the Apache Foundation credibility as well as the open source community as a whole.

Please give up the ghost - The Apache Foundation is one of the stalwart defenders of the FOSS community, but this dichotomy is destructive for everyone.

This isn’t an accident. OpenOffice’s sidebar code was copied and incorporated into LibreOffice. The Apache OpenOffice project uses the Apache License, while the LibreOffice uses a dual LGPLv3 / MPL license. The practical result is LibreOffice can take OpenOffice’s code and incorporate it into LibreOffice — the licenses are compatible. On the other hand, LibreOffice has some features — like font embedding — that don’t appear in OpenOffice. This is because the two different licenses only allow a one-way transfer of code. LibreOffice can incorporate OpenOffice’s code, but OpenOffice can’t incorporate LibreOffice’s code. This is the result of the different licenses the projects chose.

A growing number of platforms, vendors, and partners support the AMP Project by providing custom components or offering integration with AMP pages within their platforms.

All activities are best-effort (keep in mind that most of us are volunteer developers).

The date, time and place are scheduled according to when/where we can reserve Matz's time.

Problem is, everyone's busy, so it can be days or even weeks before even a small PR is merged. So I'm stashing my stuff here as I write it. I'll still try to keep the PRs in motion, to gradually get some of this merged.

Unlike Telegram, WhatsApp is not open source, so there’s no way for security researchers to easily check whether there are backdoors in its code. Not only does WhatsApp not publish its code, they do the exact opposite: WhatsApp deliberately obfuscates their apps’ binaries to make sure no one is able to study them thoroughly. 

Open source and in the public domain

organisation is open source too

We believe in the power of open source software. That’s why we participate in, contribute to, and support the open source community so strongly.

Organized by Output

The folks at Netlify created Netlify CMS to fill a gap in the static site generation pipeline. There were some great proprietary headless CMS options, but no real contenders that were open source and extensible—that could turn into a community-built ecosystem like WordPress or Drupal. For that reason, Netlify CMS is made to be community-driven, and has never been locked to the Netlify platform (despite the name).