• CriticalMiss@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Sure. The majority of the BitWarden client is licensed under the GPL, which categorizes it as “free software”. However, one of the dependencies titled “BitWarden-SDK” was licensed under a different proprietary license which didn’t allow re-distribution of the SDK. For the most part, this was never a problem as FOSS package maintainers didn’t include the dependency (as it was optional) and were able to compile the various clients and keep the freedoms granted by the GPL license. However, a recent change made BitWarden-SDK a required dependency, which violated freedom 0 (the freedom to distribute the code as you please). BitWarden CTO came out and said this was an error and fixed this, making BitWarden SDK an optional dependency once again which now makes BitWarden free software again. For the average joe, this wouldn’t have mattered as BitWarden SDK contains features that are usually favored by businesses and the average Joe can live without. So everything now returns back to normal, hopefully.

      • Gaspar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Free software had a non-free extra bit that it technically didn’t need. Accidentally got changed to need the non-free part in order to run which caused news stories. Now the change has been reverted so it’s free again.