2 ms·

I believe there is no such provision in the APGL for a reasonable period of time/delay. Unless there is an exception in the license, one would need to give remo

I believe there is no such provision in the APGL for a reasonable period of time/delay. Unless there is an exception in the license, one would need to give remote users the source code for the exact version of a program they are interacting with. It is no different from the traditional GPL in this regard. Imagine getting a (binary) copy of GCC and the README said — this is version X.Y.Z. Please wait up to two months to download the source code. Until then, you can download the source code for X.Y.Z-2. IANAL either, but my interpretation was always that you had to treat AGPL code in the same way as GPL, except for the fact that access by remote/internet users was considered a distribution.

southerntofu 5y ago
> Imagine getting a (binary) copy of GCC and the README said (...) Just like sibling commenter haukem pointed out, GPL does not mandate that you distribute the source code alongside the binary, as long as there is an official channel to request the source code. GPL license predates version control, and code often had to be snail-mailed at the time. This can lead to funny situations like famous hacker Naomi Wu dropping by hardware manufacturer offices to get the GPL source code. [0] So yes, you could distribute a binary version of FunnySoft v1.3, and it could take a few days/weeks/months to get a copy of the actual source code. [0] https://nitter.snopyta.org/RealSexyCyborg/status/1428706989274583049 https://nitter.snopyta.org/RealSexyCyborg/status/14287069892...