Open Dental probably not FLOSS (pun intended)

[MatthewVita]

@kakoni is it okay if I remove Open Dental from our list? It is seemingly not open source - here's a snippet from the website:

Call now to order Open Dental at <<redacted>>. For $169 per month (six month contract) you get all software releases as they come out plus full telephone support.

See the Ordering section for more details.

[jeromecc]

On 15/09/2018 15:57, mvim wrote: @kakoni <https://github.com/kakoni> is it okay if I remove Open Dental from our list? It is seemingly not open source - here's a snippet from the website: |Call now to order Open Dental at 503-363-5432. For $169 per month (six month contract) you get all software releases as they come out plus full telephone support. See the Ordering section for more details. | — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#43>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGp9zdlpfUzIWsqvqC0ERWz6qbPCv77Xks5ubQdKgaJpZM4WqXtH>.

Hi! I am not part of Open Dental and I never used it. The facts that you are stating have nothing to do with the fact that Open Dental is an open source software or not.

Using The Source Code *Installation Program* There is no included installation program with the source code. You can run Open Dental on your development computer without an installation program. Play with the installer that comes with the trial version, and you will quickly see what elements you need to make it function properly. In fact you can use the trial version installer, and then just substitute your compiled version for the trial exe and dll's. The Open Dental exe is simple to distribute. Just copy it to another computer and put the required dlls in the same folder. Then click on it and it will run. Remember that any forked versions are still covered by the GPL and must have source code available. You must also leave the copyright and license attached to the source code.

Apparently, Open Dental is a GPL licensed software. It is perfectly in accordance with the GPL to sell software. The only thing that could be problematic about Open Dental is that they clearly state that the software contained in the exe is a bit different from the software you obtain when you build from source code. Notably, the installer part is not in the source code. It's a common trick used by many projects but it is a violation of the license: GPL and GNU FAQ are pretty clear about the fact that you need to publish ALL the source code required to build an identical executable file. Build stuff, installer stuff is part of the software. Not including them is a violation of the license. It's like voluntarily deleting parts of the code to make it hard or impossible for people to build the software. It's a stupid trick. Also, the "trial version" is different from the real, paid for version. All of this would be legit if users who buy Open Dental received the complete source code. Even though I can't verify this, if seriously doubt they receive the full source code or a written offer to send the source code later... but I am not sure. From GNU website:

I want to distribute an extended version of a GPL-covered program in binary form. Is it enough to distribute the source for the original version? (#DistributeExtendedBinary <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#DistributeExtendedBinary>) No, you must supply the source code that corresponds to the binary. Corresponding source means the source from which users can rebuild the same binary.

Also the procedure to retrieve the source code is a bit... complicated. You need to use svn, there is not tarball. But it is explained on the website (I didn't check if it works or not). I think that their rather closed development model is wrong, but it is not a violation of the GPL. A GPL software is not required to be on GitHub! ;-) The part about not including everything to build the same cake is a violation but to be 100% sure we should ask them or their clients about the reality of obtaining the full source code able to replicate the same binary. License stuff is hard. Most people who claim to be open source enthusiasts don't really understand open source or free software licenses. jérôme

…

-- OpenPGP / GPG key: B4FC539FFF2C5B75 I encrypt emails with GPG, Thunderbird & Enigmail.

[MatthewVita]

Thank you for the insights, @jeromecc!

It appears as though it is indeed GPL software. I guess we should just leave it based on that and the facts you provided. Can't argue with that.