• unexposedhazard
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Can someone explain what this means? Isnt the whole wordpress stack open source? What relevance does this guy have?

    • LesserAbe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 minutes ago

      Do you know about how Android is open source, but Google has moved a bunch of important functionality to Google Services which makes Android less desirable without them?

      From my understanding it’s not nearly as bad as that with WordPress, but similar in that some functionality relies on non-open source stuff that this guy Matt and his company automatic control.

      He’s mad that competitor company WP Engine doesn’t contribute back to the project, so he’s making a lot of noise and making moves to limit their access.

    • Ab_intra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Have the same question. It seems to be open source but if they wanted to they could make it closed source for sure…

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        They cannot make WordPress closed source because it’s released under the GPL, which means that any closed implementation cannot use this code.

        With that said, the linked article is about access to wordpress.org, which is different from the source code of the project. I’m not entirely sure what this is about.

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 hours ago

          They can, but only if all contributors agree or their work is removed entirely, and only future releases (code released prior to that is still GPL).

      • auroz@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I don’t know what the governance setup is like, but in theory the owners of the project can change the license to whatever they like at any time.

        The catch is that this doesn’t affect old versions, which remain available under the old license. So they could make WP closed-source or make the license more restrictive, but WP-engine or any portion of the community could make a fork and maintain the open source version from there. It wouldn’t have the features added by the mainline WP project since the license change (and they’d likely have to change the branding), but that’s about all that would be lost.

        Similar things have happened in the past: see OpenOffice becoming LibreOffice for example.

      • unexposedhazard
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Nah wordpress would instantly die if it went closed source. So many businesses only function the way they do because wordpress is easily customizable.

        It would just get forked by some big webhosting company.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      There’s a strong current of people who believe the WP fight with WPEngine is bad on this guy’s behalf. He’s megalomaniacal, he’s being a spoiled rich guy, stuff like that.

      Personally I don’t see it, but I may not know enough about it. But I see this as a part of that conversation. Someone’s arguing that fighting with a private corporate business whose model depends on exploiting the software they have no intention of supporting is outrageous and he’s Gone Too Far.

    • Dot.@feddit.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Mainly, .org can block anyone from updating their software(if they are set as the update provider on your Wordpress distribution) and accessing their addons repo( which is very essential to how some websites work)