The "You can't say it is open-source" bullshit is just the first in a long line of idiots lining up to comment on it.
Just because OSI don't have a USPTO registered trademark on "open source" doesn't mean that the OSD isn't the de-facto definition of what "open source" means. One may (may) legally be able to call their project with a crappy homegrown license "open source" but they shouldn't do so.
It isn't always just about what's legal, it's about what's right, and about community consensus. And the truth is, Ungit is not open source after this change.
There is a overall accepted agreement about "open source" and just because you're not able to understand it, doesnt mean that this consent about open source is not true.
Just because OSI don't have a USPTO registered trademark on "open source" doesn't mean that the OSD isn't the de-facto definition of what "open source" means. One may (may) legally be able to call their project with a crappy homegrown license "open source" but they shouldn't do so.
It isn't always just about what's legal, it's about what's right, and about community consensus. And the truth is, Ungit is not open source after this change.