Whatever the solution behind is, if you have the resources, move to something self-hosted. Open core or not, if that topic matters to you, you might need something you can own and control. BTW, have a look on Forgejo, Codeberg and Gitea: these are the solutions I see when people look for something FLOSS, not open core, and maybe self-hostable.

It depends of the project in fact. You should reach the community and maintainers by joining them in their Discord / Slack / Matrix / whatever. They may be able to help you.

You can create first an issue, asking for improvements and create a discussion airy the maintainers so as to know which languages are not managed yet and if they are interested in new support. Explains also why you can bring good translations (e.g. native speaker, teacher, etc). It sill help to bring confidence.

Then create a pull / merge request with the updated files. For example, strings.xml ob Android, .strings in iOS, etc. But beware, localisation is not only a matter of translations. You may have also to support new languages and formats for figures, currencies, or dates for example.

Do not use translations services. Project maintainers are able to use them, and in plenty of cases the translations are not good at all or loose details.

I would have said in fact Matrix or XMPP-based solutions but it seems you already have spotted them. Maybe Mattermost?

It seems yet Bluesky has an Android app according to their GitHub repository (https://github.com/bluesky-social/social-app). However indeed nothing mentioned about F-Droid ; maybe some alternative Mastodon clients can also deal with Bluesky?

GitLab because for CI/CD is it far, far much user friendly and comfortable to use with GitLab CI compared to GitHub Actions and flows.

In addition I can integrate templates for CI/CD pipelines already defined with the To Be Continuous project (which is open source).

https://to-be-continuous.gitlab.io/doc/

Very interesting topic in fact, I am not sure a unique and perfect solution exists.

In fact, it depends to how much you earn, how matter does for you the project, how big it is, etc. It is a question of feelings after all.

For example you may want to donate $20 one time to a useful tool you use, but for an app you enjoy using which match your own values you may want to send each year $50. But for some people it is complicated to give money, they need to satisfy their own needs before and people don’t have all the same incomes.

FMPOV, if the project is “just a tool” it can be a $20 one shot. If I use the software daily, it can be $50 per year. Maybe more if I feel it will help.

About the transaction medium, it depends. Projects can use Liberapay, others PayPal or Open Collective, or also in-app purchases. I don’t use cryptocurrencies because of the transactions fees.

Hope it helps!

Yeah, reach the FSF like explained in previous comments. Or maybe contact some attorney if it matters because you may face expensive litigations… Big companies are not friendly. Or maybe contact the SFC (https://sfconservancy.org/).

In software ecosystem indeed there is an issue about the word “free” which can mean “free of charge” or “libre”, that is the reason why the term FOSS should be replaced by FLOSS.

In this very software world, the OSI defined “open source” by 10 conditions. The FSF defined also since eons the term “free / libre” by 4 liberties. These two things are the base of trust and understanding for every one.

For several years capitalist companies try to redefine these words because cannot bear to see that communities dislike or hate how they change the licences of their products (e.g. Elastic with BSL, Mongo with SSPL, Terraform with BSL too). They try to get excuse and fake reasons to be allowed to change the definitions but they are not legit at all.

About your example for a “free and anticapitalist” license, it cannot by “free” because one of the four liberties of the “free” definition is not filled.

However this is an interesting point because there is a new family of licences which appeared several years ago: the ethical licenses brought by the Organisation for Ethical Source (https://ethicalsource.dev/) which define the term « ethical source » by 7 principles. You can get more details about the anti-capitalist license here: https://anticapitalist.software/).

In few words, we must keep the OSI, FSF and OES definitions for open source, free and ethical source words because there are meanings, history, facts and fights behind. If they are disturbing for people or if people disagree, they have to create something else. Not change the definition for pure rebranding.

There is one definition of free in FLOSS. The FSF definition.

If it is your project, no need to get headaches about this. However keep for example the stuff like “Copyright YEAR - your-name” and say it’s under GPL 3 license. But nothing more.

It is kind of copyfarleft, so by essence it is it open source according to the OSI definition (which must by the only definition to use), more free / libre according to the FSF definition (which is the only definition also to keep).