What is Grayjay?

Grayjay is a cutting-edge app that serves as a video player and source aggregator. It allows you to stream and organize videos from various sources, providing a unified platform for your entertainment needs.

It’s mostly used as a YouTube frontend^. However, it is now launching as a desktop app for Linux, Mac and Windows.

  • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    16 hours ago

    My take: OSI needs to include noncommercial licenses. Companies like Mongo and Redis have to end up creating their own licenses with GPL poison pills just to survive commercial use, why not create a system where companies that want to be, and support, an “open source” ecosystem can thrive?

    Open Source existed before OSI.

    • airglow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      Proprietary source-available software existed before open source software, and that’s what these restricted licenses are. The FOSS community does not appreciate businesses co-opting the term open source to promote software that doesn’t grant users the right to use the source code for any purpose.

      • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        As a member of the FOSS community, and someone who has written an absolute truckload of FOSS software, I stand by what I said.

        Open Source was coined before OSI was formed. OSI, and the previous launch of GNU by Stallman, was to combat the new (at the time) practice of only releasing machine code and the commercial vehicles that came along with it.

        The original spirit of sharing source code for projects in academia, before software required so much more effort, still exists in licenses like SSPLv1, etc, that are not adopted by OSI.

        I, personally, think this is a bad decision.

        I, personally, feel that an organization that wishes to make their products source-available, especially those that allow noncommercial modification, should be recognized for that, not punished or gate kept.

        I, personally, would love to see OSI adopt an open attitude towards those types of organizations, and create another official tier in the lexicon with it’s own set of standard licenses that fit under it.

        I understand and accept that other’s don’t feel that way, but that does not make their opinion about what should count as “open” any better than my own, just more widely accepted at the time.