3 ms·
> However, the only way that Element can retain the right to provide alternative licenses to proprietary forks is if it has the right to do so, which means requ
by WhyNotHugo 3y ago
> However, the only way that Element can retain the right to provide alternative licenses to proprietary forks is if it has the right to do so, which means requiring a CLA
You wouldn't need a CLA if you didn't want to reserve the exclusive right to move from an open source model to an open core model. You wouldn't need a CLA if you didn't want the privilege to switch away from an open source licence at will.
Yes, a CLA is the only solution to retaining the right to un-open-source the project. The problem is that you'd want to retain this right in the first place.
- Arathorn 3y agoWe don’t want to un-open-source the project. We’re not trying to pull a hashicorp or set up to do so; we just want the option to dual license to sell AGPL exceptions.
- lannisterstark 3y agoI've used element every day for a while now, it's fantastic software... The trouble is that I want to believe you, but I'm(and I imagine certain others) having a hard time doing so.
- cvwright 3y agoElement has been giving us open source code under the most liberal license for something like 10 years. I think he’s earned a little benefit of the doubt.
- lannisterstark 3y agoWell, sure, but so did Hashicorp with terraform for 9 years. Rather successfully mind you. Things and circumstances change.