3 ms·

I have no experience with the AGPL, but I really really like the idea of it. However, I get worried when I read takes like Hector Martin's [1]. In essence, he a

by gspr 2y ago

I have no experience with the AGPL, but I really really like the idea of it. However, I get worried when I read takes like Hector Martin's [1]. In essence, he argues that it becomes very easy for the end-user to make even the most trivial of modifications to AGPL code or stuff associated to it and accidentally violate the license's quine requirement. Do you have any insight on this? [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/737708 https://bugs.gentoo.org/737708

bityard 2y ago
Hector built up a strawman in that bug, and not a very good one. I'm surprised the Gentoo devs were as patient with him as they were, given he kept trying to argue his personal interpretations which are not in line with how the AGPL is generally understood by Gentoo and other distributions. And some of the things he claims are just plain wrong.
- gspr 2y ago
  Could you elaborate a bit with specifics? I feel both sides are just opining, and I'd love to know where to stand on a license, the main idea of which I love.
philippemnoel 2y ago
The best way to avoid any such issue is to contribute changes to the upstream project, which is our goal with the choice of license. We're hoping for a centralized ParadeDB project from which everyone can benefit.
- gspr 2y ago
  > The best way to avoid any such issue is to contribute changes to the upstream project, which is our goal with the choice of license. This I understand. But it doesn't really address Martin's worry about an accidental modification. Or apparent confusion about what constitutes modification.
  - myworkinisgood 2y ago
    There's no accidental modification. > Not true. There is no need to accept the license if you exercise only your statutory rights, which in many jurisdictions includes the right to run the program and to patch it if necessary (e.g., for compatibility with other programs).
    - gspr 2y ago
      Interesting. Do you have any clarification about which these "many" jurisdictions are? Like, can we expect this to be the case in most of the world?

by gspr 2y ago

bityard 2y ago

Hector built up a strawman in that bug, and not a very good one. I'm surprised the Gentoo devs were as patient with him as they were, given he kept trying to argue his personal interpretations which are not in line with how the AGPL is generally understood by Gentoo and other distributions. And some of the things he claims are just plain wrong.

gspr 2y ago
Could you elaborate a bit with specifics? I feel both sides are just opining, and I'd love to know where to stand on a license, the main idea of which I love.

philippemnoel 2y ago

The best way to avoid any such issue is to contribute changes to the upstream project, which is our goal with the choice of license. We're hoping for a centralized ParadeDB project from which everyone can benefit.

gspr 2y ago
> The best way to avoid any such issue is to contribute changes to the upstream project, which is our goal with the choice of license. This I understand. But it doesn't really address Martin's worry about an accidental modification. Or apparent confusion about what constitutes modification.
- myworkinisgood 2y ago
  There's no accidental modification. > Not true. There is no need to accept the license if you exercise only your statutory rights, which in many jurisdictions includes the right to run the program and to patch it if necessary (e.g., for compatibility with other programs).
  - gspr 2y ago
    Interesting. Do you have any clarification about which these "many" jurisdictions are? Like, can we expect this to be the case in most of the world?