[nixos]

The problem is that it doesn't help.

Commercial open source tends to be done for two reasons:

1. Common goal development. Several companies needs a UNIX. Rather than do all the development themselves, they work together. That's how Linux works. 2. Backup if original company's strategic goals move from your goal.

Here, neither work as you can't cooperate with others due to licensing issues.

[andrewchambers]

If the license doesn't allow applying or distributing third party patches I would be annoyed. If it allows it provided each party has paid for a license I would be happy.

[jrpt]

It says right here, https://supportedsource.org/definition "Modifications. The license must permit modifications to the source code."

But you also can't just take parts of the code and redistribute it for free, because "Restricted Uses. The license should include restricted uses, such as disallowing resale or sublicensing."

The point isn't to prevent people from customizing their use of the software. The point is to create a system where developers get paid and projects are financially sustainable, instead of being abandoned or barely maintained.