3 ms·
To be honest, I didn't realize it was AGPL until they shut down (though I have to admit I haven't used it in any real project and thus haven't really evaluated
by pluma 10y ago
To be honest, I didn't realize it was AGPL until they shut down (though I have to admit I haven't used it in any real project and thus haven't really evaluated it too deeply).
My understanding would have been that AGPL means all code that interfaces with the database (i.e. all code that uses ReQL) must also be AGPL. That would have instantly disqualified RethinkDB for me (whether the understanding is right or not) and I'm sure I'm not the only one to think that way.
Considering even GPL-licensed software often prominently advertises commercial dual-licensing, this seems like a major oversight (if it wasn't for ideological reasons).
- timmaxw 10y ago> My understanding would have been that AGPL means all code that interfaces with the database (i.e. all code that uses ReQL) must also be AGPL. The client drivers are licensed separately under the Apache license. Only the database server itself is AGPL. Read the last question on the rethinkdb.com FAQ: https://rethinkdb.com/faq/ https://rethinkdb.com/faq/
- pluma 10y agoOh, absolutely. That is why I said "intuition". It doesn't matter what the license actually means. It only matters that it's a huge red flag that may prevent people from investigating further.
- williamstein 10y agoI agree that people will have exactly your concerns (despite that the drivers are apache). If Slava re-releases everything under the Apache license, I think that the chances of RethinkDB having a future are much greater. Considering a relicense is issue number 2 here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fy-drBGDTyibwEBBAX6G5otqtWiKOD2sBXmL2uVTFtE/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fy-drBGDTyibwEBBAX6G5otq...