Talk:Anaconda (Python distribution)
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NPOV
editFrom the article:
... which makes it quite simple to install, run, and update complex data science and machine learning software libraries...
This does not sound neutral at all, it sounds like an endorsement. As far as I can see, it is also uncommon for repositories and/or support sites to be linked directly from the article, let alone them having sections of their own. --80.144.236.125 (talk) 09:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Bogus reference
editTo 209.6.125.39, and whom it may concern,
This reference is bogus:
<ref name="eula">{{cite web|title=Anaconda End User License Agreement|url=https://www.anaconda.com/terms-of-service|website=continuum.io|publisher=Continuum Analytics|accessdate=December 18, 2020}}</ref>
Please pay attention to these two parts:
|title=Anaconda End User License Agreement(Wrong; it is actually a terms of service)|url=https://www.anaconda.com/terms-of-service(Correct)
And:
|website=continuum.io(Wrong; it is actually anaconda.com)|url=https://www.anaconda.com/terms-of-service(Correct)
And most importantly, the content doesn't say what 209.6.125.39 thinks.
- Hi, it seems as they silently changed their conditions. I didn't remember restrictions for commercial use, but now they are there. Also I haven't found Spider IDE providing binary Windows builds in the last summer. Now they do. -- 2.203.127.68 (talk) 13:32, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Not free/open-source software
editThe individual-edition end-user license [2] includes the clause "Commercial usage of the repository is non-compliant with our Terms of Service" and you can only redistribute the software if the "purpose of the redistribution is not part of a commercial product for resale".
This violates the Open Source Definition, which is the most commonly accepted definition of "open source" and requires compliant licenses to allow commercial use and redistribution: [3]. It's what the Free Software Foundation calls "semi-free" software [4]
(This was an April 2020 recent change [5] to Anaconda's licensing that was widely commented on at the time. [6] [7])
At some point the fact that Anaconda (in particular, their binary packages and installers from anaconda.com) is no longer free/open-source was added to the article, but it got reverted. In fact, the current page perversely links the above EULA when claiming that the individual edition is free software!