> No licensee or downstream recipient may use the Software (including any modified or derivative versions) to directly compete with the original Licensor by offering it to third parties as a hosted, managed, or Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) product or cloud service where the primary value of the service is the functionality of the Software itself.
No thanks. These “almost-but-not-quite-FOSS” licenses are a blight.
Clickup is kinda like this (trash software btw) where it combines all these things. Its super cumbersome to deal with all of them in the same UI. For example, you will be chatting with someone, need to look at ticket, you have to completely leave the context of the chat to find the ticket. Yeah you can have multiple tabs, but still cumbersome. Would rather have a chat app for chat, documentation in documentation... so on.
Could you elaborate on what makes Clickup "trash software", is it something specific to Clickup or your opinion around this entire "class" of all-in-one workspace?
IMO we need more sovereign systems like this (this is too simple IMO). Other sovereign systems are complex to deploy. if good FOSS commodity options come up, then we can expect a hosting/deployment infra and companies to setup and offer it for non self-hosters as well - ala WordPress.
i registered for their demo and it seems to be unable to do any of the advertised features. nearly everything crashes; feels like a ux wireframe not yet wired it
Can I drag an email directly onto a Kanban or a Todo list, and prioritize it like a task, and then click on the card or task to go directly to the mail message, in the context of its thread?
I want to know why this [0] needed to be co-authored by Claude. Especially because it seems like the kind of change you'd explicitly want to make without Claude's "help" (presuming that's how that got in there).
Asking Claude to commit and push triggers the Co-Authored-By thing typically, even if the change was made by hand. It could entirely be possible the author just asked it to generate a commit message for this change (although the style doesn't strike me as very Claude like).
Blocking AI users on github is such a quick way to avoid most slop and get advanced notice when an existing project has started going into tech/cognitive debt.
You'll get a warning banner for those repos if you go to these users and block them:
No thanks. These “almost-but-not-quite-FOSS” licenses are a blight.
- horrible optimization
- buggy, things that should work sometimes don't - poor ux. I have been using it for 4+ years at work, still have trouble finding things- yeah, all things in one interface
These are opinions. People can have different. To me, its just a slow and difficult to navigate mess that doesn't know what it wants to be.
[0] https://github.com/smgdkngt/dobase/commit/597684fc67b67f5a2a...
You'll get a warning banner for those repos if you go to these users and block them:
- github.com/claude
- github.com/cursoragent
- github.com/gemini-code-assist
---
Example of the warning banner and more discussion here: https://mastodon.social/@mcc/116115453811522063