5 ms·
Be careful. This is licensed under the AGPL, which basically makes it unusable. Or a commercial license can be purchased.
by antoncohen 8y ago
Be careful. This is licensed under the AGPL, which basically makes it unusable. Or a commercial license can be purchased.
- kadoban 8y ago"Unusable" seems quite strong. It's usable for open source projects.
- heroprotagonist 8y agoSort of. It's only really usable for those who want to apply the same restrictions to their users/contributors.
- giancarlostoro 8y agoI'm surprised GitHub doesn't show this on the repository it just says "View License" but I guess they don't allow using AGPL when creating a repository.
- black-tea 8y agoI noticed they stopped displaying licences on all repos recently. Everything says "view licence" now. Why would they not allow AGPL? It's a perfectly valid free software licence.
- Yeaw 8y agoThey do support showing AGPL 3.0, but it has to be either in a LICENSE.txt or LICENSE.md. This project just has it in a file called LICENSE. https://help.github.com/articles/licensing-a-repository/ https://help.github.com/articles/licensing-a-repository/
- tuxxy 8y agoRespectfully, that's bullshit.
- stefano 8y agoHaving to pay to use software commercially makes it unusable?
- coldtea 8y agoSo, the same way Adobe Photoshop is "unusable" or Oracle DB?
- bpicolo 8y agoIt's a lot to ask for a web framework, feels like, given the extreme multitude of options. Not unusable, but you're going to have a hard time getting users for an AGPL web framework.