A random thought struck me. Freedom 1 of the four software freedoms says: "The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1)." and it seems to only care about the end result "so it does your computing as you wish". This leads me to believe that it should be possible to limit the development models through licensing as long as that model can produce that result in theory. Has this loophole already been discussed? #freesoftware #opensource
For example, a license could say: "you can change this to do anything you wish, as long as you are not using SCRUM to get there" or "you can change this to do anything you wish, as long as you are not using a proprietary code repository platform". In both, anyone still have the freedom to get to the end, but the road there is limited.
@lxo I know it is not supposed to. It is kind of my point that it does anyway as generous interpretation shouldn't be needed in definitions like these.
@lxo I think you are likely right, and then an ambiguous license wouldn't be deemed to be aligned.
I haven't thought much yet but something like this might be enough "The freedom to study how the program works, and in any manner change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1)."