Hey, community :)

I run a website that showcases the best open-source companies. Recently, I’ve added a new feature that filters self-hosted tools and presents them in a searchable format. Although there are other options available, like Awesome-Selfhosted, I found it difficult to find what I needed there, so I decided to display the information in a more digestible format.

You can check out the list here: https://openalternative.co/self-hosted

Let me know if there’s anything else I should add to the list.

Thanks!

  • egerlach@lemmy.caEnglish
    3·
    1 day ago

    The Free Software Foundation requires “CLAs” as well. I have no fear that they’re going to rug-pull. I don’t think we can use that as the indicator. IMO, it’s even a good idea to have a CLA so that’s no conflict that the project owns the code.

    The warning for me is if the project is run by a company, especially a VC-backed company. Joplin isn’t, so I would be comfortable using it (although I don’t).

    • paequ2@lemmy.todayEnglish
      1·
      12 hours ago

      Interesting! I didn’t realize this! https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.en.html

      only the copyright holder or someone having assignment of the copyright can enforce the license. If there are multiple authors of a copyrighted work, successful enforcement depends on having the cooperation of all authors.

      So it seems like the FSF does this in order to be able to enforce GPL. Buuut, these guys really gotta be the exception. I feel like the probability of the FSF selling out and going full corporate evil is pretty low…

      a good idea to have a CLA so that’s no conflict that the project owns the code.

      That’s exactly the problem though. The project owning the code, instead of the contributors owning the code.