"Open Source" has always had a strong definition. I respect your work and your reasons for choosing a non-open source license. I actually read about the partn

"Open Source" has always had a strong definition. I respect your work and your reasons for choosing a non-open source license. I actually read about the partnership program on your site. I think it is an interesting business model. If you are interested, there are two big reasons why my organization would not consider adopting it: 1) We are culturally and organizationally aligned with the open source movement. 2) (More widely applicable and practical) Risk Management. If IBM takes Ansible in a direction that is not aligned with our needs, we can fork it. More importantly- we can pay some one else to fork it, or sponsor a community of developers who want to fork it. Those developers would be under no obligation back to IBM to ask for a Partnership agreement to be able to support the fork. You stated that "the license reverts to pure Apache if Vespene were ever to change hands". I did not see those terms, and that is definitely something to consider, but even with that, your organization may still make decisions that aren't aligned with a subset of the communities interests. As an aside, thank you very much for creating Ansible, it is a fine product! Good luck with Vespene, I hope you find great success with it.