4 ms·

EDIT: tptacek on AGPL http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1273231 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1273231 Your license is fine. Perhaps you should consider

by alecco 15y ago

EDIT: tptacek on AGPL http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1273231 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1273231 Your license is fine. Perhaps you should consider AGPL as it will cover the PHP-hole, too. Stay strong, don't give in to pressure by people who are sore because their open source free lunch is ending. (and this being HN this comment will probably be nuked by downvotes)

pbreit 15y ago
I downvoted. "Your license is fine" and "open source free lunch is ending" don't seem well-supported by evidence.
- alecco 15y ago
  Edit: read this first http://zedshaw.com/essays/why_i_gpl.html http://zedshaw.com/essays/why_i_gpl.html I've seen BSD developers switch to GPL because of too many freeloaders were repackaging and selling their code with a minimal frontend without even respecting proper author credit. There was even a counter-rant by Zed Shaw "The Long Beard's Revenge". There's a growing feeling of discontent with the startup-brogrammer-douchebag subgroup, as it's becoming a significant part of the whole startup scene. IMHE
  - pbreit 15y ago
    I can't think of any examples. Can you provide some? I found both of Zed's essays to be entirely unconvincing and lacking in evidence. A dearth of new open source projects? Really?? He admits that the GPL makes it hard for people to choose to use it which he counter-intuitively prefers. Ugh.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
lftl 15y ago
Stay strong, don't give in to pressure by people who are sore because their open source free lunch is ending. I don't disagree with this sentiment, but the dual licensing is somewhat of a two-edged sword. If they're perfectly fine building the entire Meteor stack in house, then a dual licensed commercial/GPL is fine, but if they're trying to encourage me to join a community of contributors to help build the platform then I'm definitely demotivated by the dual-license. Why should I contribute code to them (and presumably sign a CLA since that's the only way they can dual-license my code) if I'm going to have to pay them if I ever want to build a closed source app myself?
- alecco 15y ago
  Yep. That's why I recommended them to consider AGPL. EDIT: you should keep the GPL licence only for patches sent upstream

by alecco 15y ago

pbreit 15y ago

I downvoted. "Your license is fine" and "open source free lunch is ending" don't seem well-supported by evidence.

alecco 15y ago
Edit: read this first http://zedshaw.com/essays/why_i_gpl.html http://zedshaw.com/essays/why_i_gpl.html I've seen BSD developers switch to GPL because of too many freeloaders were repackaging and selling their code with a minimal frontend without even respecting proper author credit. There was even a counter-rant by Zed Shaw "The Long Beard's Revenge". There's a growing feeling of discontent with the startup-brogrammer-douchebag subgroup, as it's becoming a significant part of the whole startup scene. IMHE
- pbreit 15y ago
  I can't think of any examples. Can you provide some? I found both of Zed's essays to be entirely unconvincing and lacking in evidence. A dearth of new open source projects? Really?? He admits that the GPL makes it hard for people to choose to use it which he counter-intuitively prefers. Ugh.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]

lftl 15y ago

Stay strong, don't give in to pressure by people who are sore because their open source free lunch is ending. I don't disagree with this sentiment, but the dual licensing is somewhat of a two-edged sword. If they're perfectly fine building the entire Meteor stack in house, then a dual licensed commercial/GPL is fine, but if they're trying to encourage me to join a community of contributors to help build the platform then I'm definitely demotivated by the dual-license. Why should I contribute code to them (and presumably sign a CLA since that's the only way they can dual-license my code) if I'm going to have to pay them if I ever want to build a closed source app myself?

alecco 15y ago
Yep. That's why I recommended them to consider AGPL. EDIT: you should keep the GPL licence only for patches sent upstream