4 ms·

If you are in the business of making money like minio, you may as well just use a commercial license. No business will touch AGPL, they will just opt to pay for

by tensor 4y ago

If you are in the business of making money like minio, you may as well just use a commercial license. No business will touch AGPL, they will just opt to pay for a commercial license.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jenadine 4y ago
> No business will touch AGPL That's not true, I am in contact with many business using AGPL software. (Not Minio specifically) Some businesses choose not to touch it, but that's their losses.
phoronixrly 4y ago
In fact, I am starting to ask myself the opposite... 'Since project X is MIT-licensed, do they need my contribution at all? Probably not, their license probably brings them many high-quality corporate contributions.'
- mrtweetyhack 4y ago
  Except these "high-quality corporate contributions" are kept to themselves for corporate reasons.
akvadrako 4y ago
That's kinda why the AGPL is good; it lets non-businesses and open-source companies use it and encourages closed companies to purchase a license.
- dilyevsky 4y ago
  It’s not good bc it ties survivability of a project with a single company. If company folds so does your open-source project. Also imagine if linux wouldn’t be able to receive contributions from google and other big tech
  - akvadrako 4y ago
    That only works because Linux is run by customers, which the GPL covers, instead of provided as a web service. The AGPL is needed to encourage the same contributions for SASS products.
    - dilyevsky 4y ago
      > That only works because Linux is run by customers, which the GPL covers You’d be shocked to find out but linux is also run by cloud providers and offered as a service (in the form of VMs). And unfortunately because of murky water of what constitutes “derivative work” in agpl (case in point - see the title of this thread) most companies won’t ever touch agpl licensed projects

4 ms·

If you are in the business of making money like minio, you may as well just use a commercial license. No business will touch AGPL, they will just opt to pay for

by tensor 4y ago

If you are in the business of making money like minio, you may as well just use a commercial license. No business will touch AGPL, they will just opt to pay for a commercial license.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jenadine 4y ago
> No business will touch AGPL That's not true, I am in contact with many business using AGPL software. (Not Minio specifically) Some businesses choose not to touch it, but that's their losses.
phoronixrly 4y ago
In fact, I am starting to ask myself the opposite... 'Since project X is MIT-licensed, do they need my contribution at all? Probably not, their license probably brings them many high-quality corporate contributions.'
- mrtweetyhack 4y ago
  Except these "high-quality corporate contributions" are kept to themselves for corporate reasons.
akvadrako 4y ago
That's kinda why the AGPL is good; it lets non-businesses and open-source companies use it and encourages closed companies to purchase a license.
- dilyevsky 4y ago
  It’s not good bc it ties survivability of a project with a single company. If company folds so does your open-source project. Also imagine if linux wouldn’t be able to receive contributions from google and other big tech
  - akvadrako 4y ago
    That only works because Linux is run by customers, which the GPL covers, instead of provided as a web service. The AGPL is needed to encourage the same contributions for SASS products.
    - dilyevsky 4y ago
      > That only works because Linux is run by customers, which the GPL covers You’d be shocked to find out but linux is also run by cloud providers and offered as a service (in the form of VMs). And unfortunately because of murky water of what constitutes “derivative work” in agpl (case in point - see the title of this thread) most companies won’t ever touch agpl licensed projects