In case you didn’t hear TrueNAS is going partially closed source. However, there seems to be a lack of alternatives.

Any ideas on what to move to?

  • xia@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    19 hours ago

    I seem to recall reading that, but I think you have the wrong impression. I’m pretty sure it’s just there build system. They have always had two (one private for the paid stuff), and now they are just building everything “in private” not removing any source.

    There are many projects that do not have open build systems, and I can understand them eanting to cut costs and simplify infrastructure.

    e.g. just because redhat has a private build system and tries to restrict access to their binaries, that does not make them closed-source.

    • MuttMutt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I think what you are referring to is this post https://forums.truenas.com/t/clearing-the-air-on-build-scripts/64357

      There are people (likely in Asia) who are using the TrueNAS Build Tools to build versions that are no different other than removing license files and references, changing the name, changing some graphics and then selling the created ISO for profit.

      The TrueNAS code is still GPLv3 and because it was that when they started using Linux base and not FreeBSD. The FreeBSD code is released under the BSD license which does allow closing of the source at any time. But here is what the internet had to say:

      The BSD license is a permissive license that allows for minimal restrictions on how software can be used, modified, and distributed, including the ability to incorporate it into proprietary software. In contrast, GPLv3 is a copyleft license that requires any derivative works to also be distributed under the same GPLv3 terms, ensuring that the freedoms granted by the license are preserved.