5 ms·
> - We want to ensure that any extensions and modifications of the software (will make it back into the main software as open-source, so that everyone can benef
by CodesInChaos 6y ago
> - We want to ensure that any extensions and modifications of the software (will make it back into the main software as open-source, so that everyone can benefit from them.
isn't that a contradiction with
> We offer dual-licensing by the way
since dual licensing requires every contributor to agree to a CLA and not merely contributing the code under the terms of the AGPL?
- ThePhysicist 6y agoMaybe, but I don't think so. In general we plan to have every contributor sign a CLA as we want to make sure we can keep control over the development of the project, in case we will have to change its license later. Some companies don't want to contribute back to open-source software and that's fine, if they pay a license fee instead we can use that money to pay ourselves and build new features for the open-source version, so everyone benefits. I'd even say that maybe open-source software is licensed too liberally these days. Right now for-profit companies make boatloads of money on the back of open-source software, without giving back much. I think if more projects were to use contagious licenses like the (A)GPL it might actually benefit the whole open-source ecosystem. Imagine what we could build if just 1-5 % of the largest companies would pay a small license fees for the open-source libraries they use.