142

draw.io no longer open source since August 27, 2024 (github.com)

submitted 1 year ago by schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

50 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 38 points 1 year ago

TL;DR: Competitors in integrating with Atlassian are not allowed to incorporate code after the change because they used it in free add-ons, which caused the official integration (a paid add-on that is the sole source of funding) to be labeled a scam by a review in late August.

Plus, the thing was never really open source anyway:

draw.io is also closed to contributions, as it's not open source. We follow a development process compliant with our SOC 2 Type II process. We do not have a mechanism where we can accept contributions from non-staff members.

[-] peregus@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Open source means that the source code is...open, that everyone can view and use it, it doesn't mean that everyone can contribute to it. Or am I wrong?

[-] stochastic_parrot@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 year ago

People usually use the open source definition from the Open Source Initiative. That definition does have extra requirements:

https://opensource.org/osd

[-] peregus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Thanks for the clarification!

[-] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Damn great username btw 👌

[-] wurstgulasch3000@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

What you a referring to is often called "source available"

[-] chebra@mstdn.io 1 points 1 year ago

@peregus yes, wrong. Being "open" doesn't mean just "readable". Imagine an open bird cage, not just an open book. It needs to be open to fly free.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] ReakDuck@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Then nvidia produced Open Source code then I guess?

(There were Repos, but everything was Copyrighted. Noone was technically allowed to use it afaik, but it was still there about some AI stuff back then)

[-] chebra@mstdn.io 4 points 1 year ago

@ReakDuck I'm sure nvidia would like that, this "open source" label is good for marketing. They just want to avoid being actually open. Have the cake and eat it, like many businesses do.

[-] BlueBockser@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Noone was technically allowed to use it

There is your answer. draw.io can be used by everyone and for almost every purpose, so the situations aren't even remotely the same.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Henry@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 year ago

Just wondering, if a project switch to close source from open source, all the donation to the stage when it’s open source will be sent back to the donor or counted as shares?

[-] peregus@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

They count as...gone! Gone to develop what's been open source until it becomes closed source. As I think it should be, because what you helped to develop with your donation is still there.

[-] starshipwinepineapple@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't see a CLA so this is somewhat surprising that all ~30 contributors would be okay moving away from open source.

Unless this was a unilateral decision

[-] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 22 points 1 year ago

Apache is a permissive license, plus:

draw.io is also closed to contributions, as it's not open source. We follow a development process compliant with our SOC 2 Type II process. We do not have a mechanism where we can accept contributions from non-staff members.

This was added wayyyy before. OP is making this much more of a deal than it actually is.

[-] fabian@floss.social 3 points 1 year ago

@Aatube I don't see how OP is making it a big deal. That post is merely stating facts, as confirmed by the company representative in the GitHub discussion. Yes, the project was never "open-source-like governed", but it was technically open-source software. With the additional restriction in the license it's not anymore. All pretty theorical, but nevertheless true.

[-] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 8 points 1 year ago

"No longer open source" is factually true. However, it gives the impression that they did something much more drastic. It would be much better to just get to the point with something like "draw.io forbids competitors for Atlassian integration from using their code".

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 1 points 1 year ago

Up until a year ago, the README explicitly said they didn’t claim to be an open source project: https://github.com/jgraph/drawio/commit/8906f90ac0cc50a0c6da77c28cf9b2b2339277b1#diff-b335630551682c19a781afebcf4d07bf978fb1f8ac04c6bf87428ed5106870f5L10

[-] starshipwinepineapple@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

Appreciate it, i wasn't familiar with the project and didn't see that!

[-] Lysergid@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Whatever, I’m using it regardless of what shitty commercial alternatives tried to be shoved down my throat. If Draw.io goes shit I’ll just switch to ditaa

[-] sunstoned@lemmus.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Thanks for the note on Ditaa. I didn't know it existed but I love the idea of rendering bitmaps from ASCII, especially on the web. It's like Mermaid but the original syntax is a diagram in and of itself!

Like the author writes:

There is a number of formats that are text-based (html, docbook, LaTeX, programming language comments), but when rendered by other software (browsers, interpreters, the javadoc tool etc), they can contain images as part of their content. If ditaa was intergrated with those tools (and I'm planning to do the javadoc bit myself soon), then you would have readable/editable diagrams within the text format itself, something that would make things much easier. ditaa syntax can currently be embedded to HTML.

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

It's still open source. It's just that development has ceased.

[-] davidjgraph@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

It's not open source and development has not stopped.

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Whatever is still going on after the proprietary fork doesn't count. It is irrelevant, just some other payware that will enshittify as it is resold. The last canon version is the unburden foss version. For practical purpose the development ended there and it's fine. It's great it made it that far before dying. At least tgat version won't backslide in functionality or won't leverage it's adoption to extract rent.

[-] davidjgraph@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh, it will backslide. This won't run on lastest Chrome in 10 years time.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] C126@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Is there an actual open source alternative to visio?

[-] phase@lemmy.8th.world 3 points 1 year ago

https://github.com/excalidraw/excalidraw ?

[-] FrameXX@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

When excalidraw was mentioned in another comment I think it would also be worth to mention tldraw even though I don't kniw whether it can be counted as an replacement since I never used draw.io.

https://github.com/tldraw/tldraw

[-] sunstoned@lemmus.org 2 points 1 year ago

https://alternativeto.net/software/diagramly/

[-] Adalast@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Damn it... I literally just found draw.io like 2 weeks ago.

[+] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

[deleted]

[+] velox_vulnus@lemmy.ml 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

[deleted]

[-] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

I really don't understand the difference between free software and open source at tis point. It would make sense to me if this would make it nonfree, but I don't understand why is it not open source anymore. Isn't the open source definition a broader one than that of free software?

[-] brisk@aussie.zone 7 points 1 year ago

Open Source Software follows the Open Source Definition, while Free Software follows the Free Software Definition.

They have heavy overlap, one is not a subset of the other, and they are similarly restrictive, just shepherded by different groups. I'm sure there are licences that satisfy one but not the other, but they would have to be few and far between; just reading through each it's not obvious how one could satisfy only one definition.

[-] jeinzi@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago

Short and not completely true answer: Free Software and Open Source are the same thing, just with different reasoning behind them. Hence "FOSS" and "FLOSS" are also used, which combine both terms.

[-] chebra@mstdn.io 1 points 1 year ago

@ReversalHatchery @velox_vulnus

It violates "freedom 0" of the Free Software Definition too, so no difference there. This limitation on use makes is non-open-source AND non-free-software. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#fs-definition

[-] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

It's clear that it's not free software, because as the name suggests, that's about freedoms.

What is not really clear is that it's not open source. To me at least it means that the source is public, you can change it, use it, send in patches, etc, but possibly with some limitations.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] vikingtons@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

And despite that, if was still newsworthy enough to be posted like 6 times in total 😅

[-] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 year ago

I posted it to 8 communities because there are 8 communities I am aware of where this on-topic. Some people might be subscribed to only a subset of them. This is the natural consequence of the fediverse enabling us to have more than one community for discussing the same topic.

[-] vikingtons@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I suppose some instances cut others off as well (I see only 6 total) so you have a fair point

[-] andrew_s@piefed.social 2 points 1 year ago

To my mind, the ideal would be that if you, as the person who wants to share some 'open-source' news, chose one community that you think is 'best' (based on what instance it's on, if the mods are real people and are active, participation levels, whatever you think really). And we, as subscribers, would do the same. This way, the 'good' communities would thrive, and the 'bad' ones would wither away. What happens at the minute, is that there's 8 communities for open source, and there'll always will be, because they aren't in competition with one another.

(this is mostly just a general point about cross-posting behaviour, it's not meant as a dig at you personally).

[-] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 year ago

problem is I have no idea which of these communities is "best", I do not pay enough attention to things going on behind the scenes to have any knowledge of that.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] Samsy@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Thx looks like I am only in this one.