3 ms·
You're both kinda correct. What Stephane was complaining about is the whole Snap package for lxd has been marked as AGPL, and that's not correct. Check in the
by tecleandor 3y ago
You're both kinda correct.
What Stephane was complaining about is the whole Snap package for lxd has been marked as AGPL, and that's not correct.
Check in the store, down, in the license info section:
https://snapcraft.io/lxd https://snapcraft.io/lxd
Edit: also, from what I see in the commit, it doesn't make much distinction between what's AGPL and what not. https://github.com/canonical/lxd/pull/12663/commits/b8ff449ddb44dee98105b292d531584e34d3a889 https://github.com/canonical/lxd/pull/12663/commits/b8ff449d...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- headhasthoughts 3y agoIt is correct; the binary is AGPL, and Snap is a binary distribution method.
- NewJazz 3y agoNope, the binary is under both licenses. Just because they are compatible doesn't mean you can ignore the terms of one of them.
- notpushkin 3y agoI sometimes “editorialize” license names for Lunni Marketplace, too. [1] I think it’s fine: the binary is under both licenses, but one requires you to publish a notice and the other requires you to publish a notice and all source code for both parts. Since you want to know what “license burden” you’ll have to bear when you’re looking for an app in a distribution platform like this, I think it’s fair to just specify the more restrictive license. (IANAL) [1]: https://lunni.dev/docs/marketplace/ https://lunni.dev/docs/marketplace/