Thank you!
Free software is not always Open source.
It will be Free and Open.
I think you're wrong in that statement. Please name an example...And open source software is not always free.
A part uses GPL-3.0 license and another parts uses a custom license.
Bootloader: C
It has his own way of handling languages.
Seriously? Does those exists?! What's the point? People could remove the need for a license from the code and done. A donation button sounds like a way better idea?
I think you mismatched the words...
It is free: You not pay for it.
Installer: Distribution limitations. No reuploads or repacks are allowed to be shared on third party websites (meaning that they should always link the download to XEB+'s website or it's mirror). That's made to avoid people making repacks which might cause issues.
Yup. That's it. And, thanks to Enceladus we have many cool features, like, for example, the very customizable theme format:
Why are you denial and keep impute me that I am wrong? The definition of free software might exists longer than you exist, it is a fact and I put sources in the last post. I am really trying to help, because if someone asks if it's free software and you say "Yes", but it isn't in many ways, it's just a wrong claim.
free means "without cost". free does not always mean open source or even legal to distribute to other people. freeware/shareware/open-source have become confused over the years, but the definition of free has not changed yet.
still free. does not matter what he limits (features or rights), it is still free if it is at no-cost.
via wikipedia:
But please, read at least one of the articles I posted here. But a short repetition: "free means without cost" is just a bad mindset and this statement is even not true in terms of propositional logic. Only because you have the word free saved as "free as in free beer" in your mind, doesn't mean it's per definition free. And yes, the definition of free hasn't changed since the 1980s (like mentioned in this thread), only people make their own definitions out of it.
Well, sorry to both, but, as a linguist, I need to set some stuff clear here. Please, both read this carefully.
You're free to share it anywhere in the internet, but the download link must always be the one in XEB+'s website, not your own reupload to MEGA or a fishy repack. This measure is taken to avoid problems to noob users. Many YouTubers or users at forums tend to upload custom repacks of software which sometimes does not behaves as they should due to modifications being made to them. This is for safety. And, as I said before: that limitation only applies to the "installer". You're free to compile the "dashboard", modify it (except for changing the author's credits) and upload your own dashboard's fork anywhere and instruct users on how to replace the original one with yours. Also, you can make your own installer from scratch, but the, users will notice the big difference. See? Not that limited, right?
Don't worry, I got that part already covered up, legally speaking. The license is for the installer's code and binary themselves, while the other components of the installer (IRX modules and so on) are loaded from external files, not bundled in the binary which breaks no other license at all. The installer's code is made from scratch, so it does not responds to other pre-existing software license.
Well, sorry to both, but, as a linguist, I need to set some stuff clear here. Please, both read this carefully.
So, here's the definition of free: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/es-LA/dictionary/learner-english/free
free adjective (NO COST)
not costing any money:
a free sample of perfume
Entry is free for children under 12.
Children get into the museum free of charge.
free adjective (NOT A PRISONER)
not in prison or in a cage:
He opened the cage and set the birds free.
There are more definitions, but we will focus on these two only. Which is the one applied to the original definition of "Free Software"?
Well, in order to know which, we need to look at the translations to other languages. For example, Spanish and Portuguese:
Software libre / Software livre.
Hmm... "libre", as in "NOT A PRISONER". (For now own I will keep only with Spanish)
See... free as in "no cost" is "gratis" while free as in "not a prisoner" is "libre".
So, it seems that @maxmoon is correct in the original meaning, but focus on "original".
While the conception of the terminology was not prisoner software, due to popular usage, it has evolved.
This is normal in every language and in every concept. The language is made by the people and the meanings evolve over time, making the most common usage at the time, the correct one. I'm doing something "based", but you'll see where I am going.
I will provide another Spanish example: Our word for "table" is "mesa", while in other languages is "taula" (ca), "table" (fr, en), "tavolo" (it), etc... Why don't we use "tabla"? Well, our "mesa" (sp) does not comes from "tabula" (Latin/la, means "table"), instead it comes from "mensa" (la, means "measure"). So, why did we got it from there? Well, that word (mensa) which was the "measure" of the food they offered to Gods, evolved to "plato" (which at the time had the same meaning as "mensa", but later evolved to "dish"), then, afterwards, "mensa" and "plato" (Informal Latin and Latin respectively) both evolved it's meaning to "rationed food", then "mensa" evolved to "table where the food is served" (mesa en la que se sirve la comida) and then evolved to just a normal table, a "mesa". The fun fact and punchline is that while the word "mensa" (measure) evolves to "mesa" (table), Informal Latin (then Spanish) speakers also used "tabula" (la, table) and his evolution, tabla (sp, table), but, over time, mesa (table) beat tabla (tabla) and became the definitive winner, all thanks to how people used them. "Tabla" (sp, table) then evolved to "tabla" (sp, a piece of wood in a plain shape, like the top of a table) and stays to only that nowadays.
So, in the same way that evolved over time that "tabla" (table) became just "a piece of wood", "free software" has deviated from the original "software libre" (as in not a prisoner) and now it is "software gratis" (as in free of charge).
Language evolves, deal with it. The original meaning is now lost and only used by a selected few, just as tabla is not a mesa anymore in Spanish. Like it or not, that's how languages work.
You're free to share it anywhere in the internet, but the download link must always be the one in XEB+'s website, not your own reupload to MEGA or a fishy repack. This measure is taken to avoid problems to noob users. Many YouTubers or users at forums tend to upload custom repacks of software which sometimes does not behaves as they should due to modifications being made to them. This is for safety. And, as I said before: that limitation only applies to the "installer". You're free to compile the "dashboard", modify it (except for changing the author's credits) and upload your own dashboard's fork anywhere and instruct users on how to replace the original one with yours. Also, you can make your own installer from scratch, but the, users will notice the big difference. See? Not that limited, right?
What we want to avoid is confusions in noob users while we don't limit pro users. I think my approach on the licensing fits properly that.
Don't worry, I got that part already covered up, legally speaking. The license is for the installer's code and binary themselves, while the other components of the installer (IRX modules and so on) are loaded from external files, not bundled in the binary which breaks no other license at all. The installer's code is made from scratch, so it does not responds to other pre-existing software license.
So... Bazinga!
The thing is you don't understand the very language you speech.
The only software license with total freedom is WTFPL. Every other license has limitations (hence, not giving full freedom to the software). So, as in your so-called "as in free speech" software, only the ones under the WTFPL license fits your concept. Everything else, has at least one limitation. Get the point? The bare existence of a license (with the exception of the one I mentioned) takes away the software's freedom. So, yes, I'm just making a license that like almost every other license out there, keeps the software in a limited prison with some freedom permissions.
And you fell directly into the trap... I knew you where going to say that, but guess what, you said everything else in that post using American English with the exception of that word, so I decided to point that out. You do remember this, right?:
OK, but...
The fact is that I provided you a proper interpretation some posts above ( https://www.psx-place.com/threads/psx-scene-a-way-to-go-back-in-time.20476/page-3#post-345622 ) while you failed to understand that the language evolves with time and so does the definitions and, also, you failed to understand what does a prisoner does not has (he lacks of freedom).
Please, point which is the correct definition of "free" in that sentence. Only official Cambridge definitions will be acepted as valid responses: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/es-LA/dictionary/learner-english/free
I think you're confusion XEB+'s installer with the whole XEB+ project, but, as you wish...
Yeah, I will apply that...
True, but it is the only one which gives total freedom.
