IF YOU DO NOT OWN THE SOFTWARE, THEN DO NOT DOWNLOAD,
INSTALL, COPY OR USE THE SOFTWARE.
You further acknowledge that title and full ownership
rights to the Software will remain the exclusive property
of BigHit and/or its suppliers,
Thanks for expressing your concern, it's totally understandable and we appreciate that.
Now, to clear things up: we're a team of 10 and we spent an entire year on developing Meat!, day in, day out. To be honest, the license was our least concern, we just wanted to give you software that wouldn't be just another GitLab clone (hi there GitLab folks!) and we didn't devote the license the attention it required. Sorry about that, we're going to give it a closer look once we get some sleep this weekend.
Anyway, if there's enough response from the community for Open Source - then we'll do Meat! Open Source. We've never had any problems with that and we never will. Just let us know.
We're going live next week and you'll be able to evaluate the software for yourself. Your feedback will be most welcomed.
Alex and the Team at Meat!
Anyway, if there's enough response from the community for
Open Source - then we'll do Meat! Open Source. We've
never had any problems with that and we never will. Just
If your service is worth money, it will make money regardless of who can see your source code, but it does not reflect well on your team as a business operation that you were unable or unwilling to properly construct or acquire the single most important document relating to your income.
I think that comparing Meat! to GitLab is more like comparing Star Wars to Star Trek (choose whichever you like best) than, say, choosing between the the Lannisters and House Targaryen :)
However, I don't understand the apparent outrage and flaming going on by others here. If you guys would've only had a payed plan without the option to self-run there would've been no problem. You offer self-hosting for free, something that you'd pay for with other services, and you are suddenly seen as the bad guys. Very strange.
Congrats on a very nice looking tool :).
The actual problem here is that, having decided to use a non-free license for their code, they created a shitty one, which will not hold up, and is unsuitable for use when entering into a commercial relationship.
They still have plenty of time to repair this before going live, or public, or exiting stealth, or showing anything to anyone, or whatever they feel like calling it. But such an obvious misstep is very, very concerning to see in a company that proposes to maintain the software that manages such an important resource.
Just publish the repo, right now, and hope for the best. Don't forget to include a license file.
Can you think of another action you can take right now that would change public opinion of your project more? :)
Bonus points for self hosting!
Cool, I won't.
> Do you want Meat! to be open-source? Pleas tell us @getm3at why you think it is important and we will definitely consider your opinion. We want Meat! to be adopted as widely as possible :)
it look pretty nice!
BigHit 5 LONDON ROAD, LONDON, SW17 9JR, UNITED KINDOM
> Request your free download now
Nah, thanks, just point me at the repo.
Alex from Meat!
As it stands, the project's continuous use of the word "free" to mean gratis when marketing software meant for other programmers (if it was for non-technical users, I wouldn't object), I find to be deceptive.
I must say that Meat looks very good.
Don't be scared by the fact that it's done in PHP. It's actually really well done is very active in bringing out new updates and features.
We use it for GHC, and I've had bugs fixed within 10 minutes of finding them on our live install thanks to the devs. They've also helped us write extensions and customize our Phab install. We've had a very good experience all around.
PS. I love the name. I will spread it!
1. I find it amusing to irritate people who are so easily irritated by that sort of thing (I know, I should poke bears, but...)
2. People not using the project because of the name acts as a self selection device for the userbase. The sort of people who care so much about the name are more likely to be the sort of users who are costly (or impossible) to try keep happy generally...
Also, there's a bit of a gap between being uncomfortable with something and being "impossible to keep happy".
They can of course name their app whatever they want, but it seems to me that if you're selling something as innocuous as a git hosting platform that you'd do your best to distance yourself from something so needlessly alienating to potential customers.
In may experience (everybody else's may of course vary!) people who are easy to offend are also difficult to please. I deal with difficult people in my day job, I like a break from them in my personal projects!
> but it seems to me that if you're selling something
Now that is a significant point - once you are actively selling on an open market then commercial concerns (if nothing else) dictate you be careful about naming.
Of course there is nothing to stop you haveing two names: the free-for-personal use "Agent Ransack" also goes by "File Locator Pro" for commercial licenses, presumably because the latter sounds more professional.
Edit: thought I'd mention that 'meat' has many definitions, one being male genitalia. Also, possibly "The essence, substance, or gist" (had to look that up for good verbiage). If it was something more like "bovine slaughterhouse" then I probably wouldn't be interested in it at all.
1) This thread is about a kinda-competitor to GitLab, so maybe he was just here reading it.
2) There are monitoring services like:
Add it on a decent reader, filter for the word "GitLab", and you're done.