Update: Bitwarden posted to X this evening to reaffirm that it's a "packaging bug" and that "Bitwarden remains committed to the open source licensing model."

ForgottenFlux@lemmy.world · edit-2 2 months ago

Update: Bitwarden posted to X this evening to reaffirm that it's a "packaging bug" and that "Bitwarden remains committed to the open source licensing model."

StarlightDust@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 months ago

Mirror of what xxkylexx, Bitwarden Developer, said on Reddit:

Hi, Thanks for sharing your concerns here. We have been progressing use of our SDK (software development kit) in more use cases for our clients. However, our goal is to make sure that the SDK is used in a way that maintains GPL compatibility.

the SDK and the client are two separate programs

code for each program is in separate repositories

the fact that the two programs communicate using standard protocols does not mean they are one program for purposes of GPLv3

Being able to build the app as you are trying to do here is an issue we plan to resolve and is merely a bug.

From how I understand it, it appears they are saying that the bug was that it was possible to build externally.

Update: Bitwarden posted to X this evening to reaffirm that it's a "packaging bug" and that "Bitwarden remains committed to the open source licensing model."

Update: Bitwarden posted to X this evening to reaffirm that it's a "packaging bug" and that "Bitwarden remains committed to the open source licensing model."

Concerns Raised Over Bitwarden Moving Further Away From Open-Source