4 ms·
I see. I would definitely urge you to consider this very soon: AFAIK you can't do any commercial licenses with AGPL without A) some form of dual license and CL
by jarofgreen 6y ago
I see.
I would definitely urge you to consider this very soon: AFAIK you can't do any commercial licenses with AGPL without A) some form of dual license and CLA or B) just never accepting pull requests from anyone.
But also, does this also apply to your own cloud hosted offering? Without sorting this out, all the software in your cloud hosting product now has to be fully open-source. And I get that's your philosophy, but would there not be any tiny bit you want to keep closed - maybe the anti-fraud stuff around your billing system, for instance?
This seems a key point that I'm very interested in, so sorry for pushing!
- Conan_Kudo 6y agoAGPL doesn't work the way you think it does. An anti-fraud system service can easily communicate with Plausible over a network connection through an IPC interchange (HTTP, gRPC, etc.) without triggering that issue. The extension to Plausible to support that itself would be AGPL, but the anti-fraud service itself would not have to be.
- jarofgreen 6y agoYes - I was thinking of internal code, not an external service. But yeah, knowledge of what would or would not be covered by AGPL seems crucial here.
- Conan_Kudo 6y agoYou'd probably want to be able to communicate with multiple anti-fraud systems anyway, so I would expect it to be something plugged into Plausible and not part of Plausible itself.