

Popcorn Time repository is now self-hosted - galapago
https://git.popcorntime.io/

======
ollymorgs
How come not GitLab ([https://about.gitlab.com/](https://about.gitlab.com/)) ?

~~~
iancarroll
Stash is nice, I don't see a reason to use GitLab over it IMO.

~~~
ollymorgs
Sorry I meant because of the license. Stash has limited number of users, and
requires you to upgrade the license to have more than 10.

GitLab CE on the other hand allows unlimited users for free.

That's what I thought at-least, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

~~~
dljsjr
Atlassian is very OSS friendly and provides unlimited user open source
licenses for all of their products:
[https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview](https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview)

EDIT: That is to say, they provide a special unlimited license for all of
their products to OSS projects.

~~~
shitlord
Isn't Atlassian afraid of getting sued, though? It seems like a HUGE risk to
take on a project like Popcorn Time. Then again, Atlassian makes millions of
dollars annually.

~~~
dljsjr
The open source license is for self hosting, not OnDemand, so I'm not sure if
there are really licensing implications there or not. Does an OSS license
equate to an endorsement in a legal sense? I don't seem them generating a lot
of ill-will from a PR stance.

~~~
slang800
I would actually think that providing hosting to Popcorn Time would be
positive PR: people who contribute to Popcorn Time would spend the most time
interacting with Stash and are unlikely to be morally opposed to Popcorn Time.
While people who are opposed to Popcorn Time are much less likely to check
what Popcorn Time's repo is being hosted on or who gave them a license...
Basically, Atlassian's generosity would only be noticed by Popcorn Time
supporters.

That being said, I'd still much rather see Popcorn Time hosted on an open-
source platform like Gitlab.

