views:

42

answers:

3

I remember reading about an open source license which did not grant permission to fork.

I don't remember its name and thought it might be easier to ask here than to go through the entire list of OSI's approved licenses. Anyone knows which license I might be talking about?

A: 

By definition Open Source allow fork: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_definition

A license that didn't allow forking isn't an Open Source license

Alois Cochard
It's defenition of FSF. You, as an author, have the right to have your own opinion of "what is open source software" and which rights you grant to the end users.
BarsMonster
Berming specifically invoked the OSI which has a very specific definition.
JUST MY correct OPINION
@Alois, The one I'm talking about was already approved by the OSI, so I know for fact that one already exists.
Berming
@Berming really surprising ! Waiting for the proof ...
Alois Cochard
@Alois, Yeah, I was surprised too when I read about it. Wish I had bookmarked it.
Berming
+2  A: 

First thing which comes to my mind is CC-ND: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/

BarsMonster
Note that this is _not_ an Open Source license by the OSI definition, and it's not on the list that you quote. The list itself is CC-licensed so the omission is not because OSI is unaware of the CC family of licenses.
MSalters
+1  A: 

I suspect that you're embarking on a doomed quest here, given that item 3 of the OSI definition of an open source license seems to explicitly prohibit a clause that would prevent forking.

JUST MY correct OPINION