3 ms·
Looks really nice except agpl license which I used to think meant that any integration towards any existing solution. At this point I've recently read someone
by eitland 7y ago
Looks really nice except agpl license which I used to think meant that any integration towards any existing solution.
At this point I've recently read someone from FSF(?) saying this is only MongoDB and others misinterpretation so at this point I am just utterly confused.
Also, when somebody uses AGPL that usually means: we found the scariest license we could find while still calling it open source, but, we have a commercial license to sell you.
However I couldn't find any licensing option. Does this mean it isn't just a way to sell commercial licenses?
I'm completely honest here. I really don't get it, but then again it took a while before I really understood the GPL as well so I'm ready to be enlightened :-)
- cpach 7y agoTBH I hadn’t noticed that it’s licensed under the AGPL. I haven’t studied that license closely but yeah, I guess for many companies it’s considered a liability.
- eitland 7y agoThanks anyway! I went ahead to study the FSF FAQ but they don't really answer it completely as far as I can see. The clear cut answers are: - if you combine your program with an AGPL program then your program has to become AGPL as well, just like the GPL. - if you use an AGPL program unmodified it doesn't seem like you have to distribute kt to users who use it over the network But as far as I can see the FAQ doesn't say what happens if the AGPL program reaches out to other applications to get data. For some reason I always though anything that was touched by the AGPL program, either over the network or otherwise would have to become AGPL. If that isn't the case - and there is more and more to suggest that, then I think FSF should point that out clearly.