What comes after “open source” ↦
Open Source advocates prefer permissive licenses, and Free Software advocates prefer viral/copyleft licenses. What’s the difference? Well, that’s the topic for a different essay. Because here’s the thing: the jig is up. We’ve already hit the root problem. And you probably didn’t even notice. It took me a long, long time to notice.
Sign in or Join to comment or subscribe
Indeed, using open-source software does not mean one needs to be exclusive about it.
For example, the Debian distribution does allow, and provides means to install, closed or even non-free software - the firmware for the wifi or graphic cards included. Same for Fedora. In both cases, the user must explicitely choose to do so but it’s only a matter of enabling the appropriate software repository.
Apple didn’t take over webkit as you describe. Webkitgtk is still being developed by Collabora and benefits from safari development.
I would, however, be more reserved about what Google did to webkit a.k.a. blink - which has been made very hard to use in other projects. Electron devs surely won’t deny that.