That really is not a satisfying answer. It is incredibly nebulous and even if it did have a nice definition I guarantee most software developers will tell you a lot of software rarely reaches that state.

I can see why they might want to avoid 1000 GitHub issues bike shedding things but they could open source the code and just not have open contribution

[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Sometimes you’re ashamed of the ugly hacks you cobbled together to reach MVP, and you want to fix the stuff you know you need to fix first before being thrown to the wolves. I can respect that, for a limited time.

[–] EuroNutellaMan@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

I mean maybe but you could also just say "we did some whacky shit here help us fix it please" and let the community help you in the effort. That's the beauty of open source. Then again they may have their reasons and frankly I'm not even interested in a TikTok like social media so w/e as long as they don't eat up their word it's fine.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

or they can also disable submitting issues for now

[–] potentiallynotfelix@lemmy.fish 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

That means very little to me. Actions speak louder than words, and it would probably help the development of loops if it was actually open source.

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 1 points 15 hours ago

For a lot of FLOSS projects, it's common to keep the initial team small, so a product can be delivered fast, and gets opened up later.

It's to solve the "too many cooks" and prevent bikeshedding.

A lot of corpo espionage is there solely to tank potential competitors, which include FLOSS projects.

[–] MrRazamataz@lemmy.razbot.xyz 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Made by the same dev as Pixelfed, which did a similar thing.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 3 points 15 hours ago

Which I think dansup should deserve our trust on this for quite a long time for doing. It isn't empty promises if they already made Pixelfed and opensourced it.

Like.. I suppose it could be a grift, anything could but I see no reason to question their goals or motives.

[–] autonomoususer@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Loops is anti-libre software confirmed.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 day ago

anti? is it against libre software? because it doesn't seem so

[–] stevo887@lemmings.world -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why does software have a political stance?

[–] autonomoususer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's missing a libre software licence text file.