0

Is there an ethical conflict with using a closed source platform for supporting an open source project? Namely, AskUbuntu is part of StackExchange and I went looking for the StackExchange source code. I didn't find it. By the way, I did find some clones.

Now, personally, I don't much care either direction and always recommend that people use what works for them. Just because I use open source doesn't mean that others must do so. I've never been much of a zealot.

Anyhow, I realize this seems like an opinion question and, indeed, I'm also interested in opinions. However, I am kind of wondering if there is an "official" statement concerning the use of closed source where this site is concerned? Additionally, I understand, from my reading, that there's a bit of a special relationship betwixt the two companies.

So, no, I'm not just wanting opinions (those are welcome, if allowed) but I'm actually wondering if there's an official policy or public statement concerning this. I can not seem to find it nor am I seeing any answers here on this site.

  • This is my first question posted so I do welcome correction, insight, or edits. I wasn't sure where this would go, so here it is. – KGIII Oct 18 '15 at 1:45
5

I'd like to point out the code behind the Ubuntu One file synchronisation service was closed source until they stopped the service. While it is not justification for anything being closed source, I daresay it's a good indicator that Canonical wouldn't care much about Stack Exchange's closed-source nature.

  • Thanks for the info. I'd noticed that too but wasn't sure if there was some sort of 'mission statement' or anything. It's also trivial to add proprietary drivers during install, for instance. I don't, personally, have a complaint - it's just curiosity and a question of there being some sort of official policy on this. I can't seem to find one here, for this site, or anything on the main site - a site that links to this. I'll still vote ya up - 'tis helpful after all. – KGIII Oct 18 '15 at 2:06
  • 3
    Nonetheless the fact that they actively collaborated to this project itself rules them out of the conscientious objectors category. – kos Oct 18 '15 at 10:26
  • Thanks a lot. I think that I'm going to set this answer as the accepted answer and now I know how the process works. sl choo choo! I'm figuring this place out slowly but surely. Thanks again. – KGIII Oct 18 '15 at 13:38

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .