4 ms·

Precisely that. A more relevant example might be something like my web-facing software, `bitcoin-top`, which I release under the AGPL. https://bitcoin.esoteri

Precisely that. A more relevant example might be something like my web-facing software, `bitcoin-top`, which I release under the AGPL. https://bitcoin.esotericnonsense.com https://bitcoin.esotericnonsense.com You are free to copy the source code and run it on your website, as a part of your website (e.g. link to it on a subdomain), etc. In that case the matter of whether you have to offer the source is kind of immaterial - it's the same source I'm offering and have mirrored at least 4 times, and in this year 2019 we don't need to be shipping CDROMs about. I don't believe that your statement: * If you don't modify the AGPL program, you don't have to offer source. is strictly correct, rather that it's simply the case that if you don't modify it, you're already offering source, you can just point people to my github or whatever. If you modify it and serve a different version, say a litecoin node monitor or you tweak and improve it or whatever, you must release the source code because our software would be licenced under the AGPL.

brandmeyer 7y ago
> I don't believe that your statement: * If you don't modify the AGPL program, you don't have to offer source. is strictly correct, rather that it's simply the case that if you don't modify it, you're already offering source, you can just point people to my github or whatever. Clause 13 of the AGPL specifies that you must offer the Corresponding Source via "a network server at no charge". It doesn't say it has to be your network server. But if upstream shut down for some reason, you'd have to come up with some other method to offer users the source.
- esotericn 7y ago
  Right.
singron 7y ago
> I don't believe that your statement: * If you don't modify the AGPL program, you don't have to offer source. is strictly correct, rather that it's simply the case that if you don't modify it, you're already offering source, you can just point people to my github or whatever. It's right in section 13: > Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network [the source code] This is simpler than the rules for distributing the binary.

brandmeyer 7y ago

> I don't believe that your statement: * If you don't modify the AGPL program, you don't have to offer source. is strictly correct, rather that it's simply the case that if you don't modify it, you're already offering source, you can just point people to my github or whatever. Clause 13 of the AGPL specifies that you must offer the Corresponding Source via "a network server at no charge". It doesn't say it has to be your network server. But if upstream shut down for some reason, you'd have to come up with some other method to offer users the source.

esotericn 7y ago
Right.

singron 7y ago

> I don't believe that your statement: * If you don't modify the AGPL program, you don't have to offer source. is strictly correct, rather that it's simply the case that if you don't modify it, you're already offering source, you can just point people to my github or whatever. It's right in section 13: > Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network [the source code] This is simpler than the rules for distributing the binary.