文章摘要
Liquibase在更换许可证后仍自称"开源"引发争议，相关讨论在GitHub上形成议题。用户对其宣传方式提出质疑，认为新许可证已不符合开源定义。
文章总结
Liquibase在许可证变更后仍自称"开源"引发争议
核心内容： 1. 问题背景：Liquibase数据库迁移工具已将其许可证从开源许可证变更为"Functional Source License"（功能性源代码许可证），该许可证不被认可为开源许可证。但项目在GitHub仓库的README.md等文档中仍继续标榜自己为"开源项目"。
争议焦点：
- 用户richardfontana在GitHub提交issue指出，虽然Liquibase公司在其官方博客中承认新许可证不属于开源许可证，但项目文档仍存在误导性描述。
- 当前仓库描述与事实不符，可能对用户/开发者造成混淆。
用户诉求：
- 要求修改README.md等文档，删除"开源"相关表述
- 用户表示愿意提交PR协助修正（已获32个点赞支持）
项目现状： - GitHub仓库保持活跃（5.3k星标，1.9k分支） - 官方尚未对此issue作出回应 - 无标签/里程碑/负责人分配
注：原文中大量GitHub导航菜单、功能选项等无关内容已省略，保留核心技术争议和社区反馈。
评论总结
评论总结：
- 对Liquibase许可证变更的批评
认为从开源转为非开源的做法缺乏透明度且日益普遍 "these sort of 'we were FOSS and surprise we're not anymore' are becoming commonplace" (评论4) "we'd like to make people believe we respect their freedom, but are not actually convinced" (评论15)
指出新许可证(FSL)对开源生态系统的实际影响 "wonder if a project which uses Liquibase can be included in Debian, Fedora" (评论16) "poses a problem for OSS projects such as Keycloak" (评论16)
- 关于"开源"定义的争议
部分用户认为源代码可见不等于开源 "Liquibase says it is not [open source]" (评论12) "claiming source available is the same as open source" (评论11)
另一方认为术语本身含义模糊 "open source as a term surely just implies the source code is publicly available" (评论6)
- 替代方案讨论
- 用户转向其他数据库迁移工具 "everyone I know switched to Flyway" (评论7) "Maybe Pocketbase as an alternative" (评论2) "I really like Sqitch these days" (评论8)
- 对Liquibase的指责
- 认为公司自身选择导致了当前局面 "Liquibase has only itself to blame" (评论14) "used Apache instead of strong copyleft...then expected others to not do the thing Liquibase chose to allow them" (评论14)
- 其他观点
- 建议分叉项目 "anyone thought about forking?" (评论13)
- 认为争论无意义 "the most annoying debate with tab vs space or mac vs windows" (评论5)