nest2D is not Open Source

[abetusk]

From your project description, you say

The free and open source solution for nesting problem.

but you do not provide a license for the project, making the project "closed source" (at least here in the USA) since there is no indication what license the project falls under.

Additionally, looking at the nest2d.online terms and conditions page, there is the following verbiage:

You must not:

• Republish material from nest2d
• Sell, rent or sub-license material from nest2d
• Reproduce, duplicate or copy material from nest2d
• Redistribute content from nest2d

Which explicitly prohibits reproduction, reuse or resale.

"Open Source" has a generally accepted meaning of being able to use the digital artifacts for commercial purposes. The OSI and Wikipedia's entry on open-source licensing both articulate that commercial re-use is a (generally accepted) requirement of an "open source" license.

The term "free and open source" is especially misleading in your project as this is generally considered to encompass the ideas of "free software" and "open source".

If you mean free as in gratis, then you should say "free of charge". If your intent was to be transparent about your code by publishing it, you should say "source available", not "open source". As stated, this is misleading as someone casually looking at your project would mistake it for a free and open source project that they could reproduce, alter and repackage/resell if they desired.

[VovaStelmashchuk]

Thx, for feed back.
Can you create a pull request with correct Terms and condition. I will merge it into production. I want to make the project real open source

[abetusk]

This is about intent on your part and what type of license you want for your work. It looks like there's some ambiguity of which portions are libre/free/open. For example, there's a FOSS license under the backend directory (here) but not for the nest2dvue directory (here).

You can refer to "How to Use GNU Licenses for Your Own Software" on gnu.org. Both gnu.org and opensource.org have FAQs to help answer some questions about licensing (gnu.org FAQ, opensource.org FAQ).

Further, as I linked above, it looks like there's pretty restrictive wording in the "Terms and Conditions" page, which you might want to review. As stated, to me, it looks like you're not only restricting the software but also any digital artifacts downloaded from nest2d.online. You might want to clearly delineate if you're making the software libre/free/open but make claims over the resulting "nesting" downloads or whether you're allowing the user to have ownership over the resulting nested digital file that they download.