After I called out Franco about his "innovation" https://twitter.com/htilonom/status/762900038892789760
Franco got a little ranty and wrote a few gems:
https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=2552.msg11656#msg11656
Google translate: https://i.imgur.com/mMlf8Ze.png
Where among loads of his spins about how he actually likes pfSense (but not so much pfSense copyrights) Franco wrote this beaut:
https://i.imgur.com/HRyC4wK.png
Yep, Franco officially claims it's thanks to him and his weekend project pfSense moved from ESF license to Apache license!!! I can't even compute this level of stupidity and maliciously served disinformation.
OPNsense and Franco started the whole "pfSense isn't open source" crapfest in the first place, so naturally, they now claim pfSense changed license because of them. Fact is, pfSense was always open source, and if it wasn't OSS, OPNsense wouldn't exist. And if you compare the "old" ESF license to Apache license, you'll notice the licenses are identical. pfSense even wrote a blog post about it explaining about their license update. Specifically:
Where the 2-Clause and 3-Clause BSD licenses provides no direct language around the areas of copyright, patents and trademarks, the Apache License does. The Apache License is very clear that individual contributors grant copyright license to anyone who receives the code, that their contribution is free from patent encumbrances (and if it is not, that they license that patent to anyone who receives the code,) and that use of Trademarks extends only as far as is necessary to use the product. As a reminder, only genuine pfSense software can bear the registered trademark of pfSense. It also includes a patent termination clause, should a lawsuit arise.
From https://blog.pfsense.org/?p=2103
So it's pretty clear that only reason why ESF or Apache licenses are used is to protect the pfSense brand.
I cannot compute why OPNsense now claims Apache is "okay" and takes credit for the change, yet the IDENTICAL license wasn't acceptable. Well I can, it was to raise FUD, to demonize pfSense and to make pfSense look less "open" while they the "open sense" are truly open source.
I've previously pointed out that Jos Schellevis, guy who pays for OPNsense claimed pfSense isn't "real" OSS https://www.reddit.com/r/OPNscam/comments/4ocq0c/opnsense_claims_pfsense_isnt_open_source_ha_ha_ha/
Frankly, these malicious lies from Franco are good, keep it coming. This is truly rock solid proof that Franco is a deranged malicious person who really has no clue about open source nor OPNsense is even 1% of what they claim it is.
Oh and in his forum rant, Franco plays the sympathy card, how he the poor developer and volunteer is constantly under "attack" by evil dude Jim Thompson and "his anonymous troll". At the same time that poor guy Franco tried to steal pfSense trademark for Europe. At the same time, poor Franco got BANNED with his project from Wikipedia for horrendous abuse and self-promotion. That same poor Franco steals code from pfSense on daily basis... but somehow he's the good guy. All he wants to is to code, but since he can't, he'll use someone else's work and take credit for it.
I'll just ignore the part where he also takes the credit for pfSense 2.3 GUI because Franco is now being just dumb.
However the part about pfSense tools I won't let slip. OPNsense tools are exact copy of pfSense build tools
https://github.com/opnsense/tools/tree/b0079b541421194f9acd9199c7061335af1f3672/build
Franco and OPNsense caused huge noise when pfSense suspended the build tools repo. Why? Because without it, even today's OPNsense couldn't be built. See that "written by Scott" comment? Scott Ulrich, one of pfSense founders. And that's the closest Franco respects the pfSense copyright. He completely removed pfSense copyright and added Scott's PRIVATE email as if that's the license. Example:
From https://github.com/opnsense/tools/commit/b0079b541421194f9acd9199c7061335af1f3672
Copyright (C) 2010-2011 Scott Ullrich sullrich@gmail.com
Yep, Franco went trough all the copyright and remove pfSense, replacing it with absolutely wrong and intentionally private copyright. However, that's a story for a new post that I'll write.
So there you have it. After I called out Franco that he takes credit for bsdinstaller and ability to install any FreeBSD via ssh (which pfSense livecd had since forever) he decided to take credit for pfSense Apache license change.
Keep it coming Franco.