Pull request #10974 introduces the @bitwarden/sdk-internal dependency which is needed to build the desktop client. The dependency contains a licence statement which contains the following clause:

You may not use this SDK to develop applications for use with software other than Bitwarden (including non-compatible implementations of Bitwarden) or to develop another SDK.

This violates freedom 0.

It is not possible to build desktop-v2024.10.0 (or, likely, current master) without removing this dependency.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Danitos@reddthat.com 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

@bitwarden bitwarden locked and limited conversation to collaborators

They also locked the thread 16 hours ago (as of writing this comment), with no explanation.

[–] asap@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The explanation is the second-to-last comment before it got locked. 🤦

This hysteria is really stupid.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

That "explanation" is unsatisfactory and likely wrong: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation

So they either have to license their SDK under a GPLv3 compatible license, or switch the license of their client to a non-GPL one.

Their "explaination" only mentions why they think can do it, but not why they are doing it.

[–] asap@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That may or may not be the case, but the comment I replied to said they locked the thread with "no explanation".

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

I would say a proper explanation includes the goal you want to achieve, not just the statement that you think that you are allowed to do something.

[–] Danitos@reddthat.com 2 points 1 week ago

That's the technical explanation for the changes, no an explanation for closing the discussion all together.

[–] prosp3kt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

They banned me from reddit and then reported me with mods those fckers...