3 ms·

> Software released under an MIT license allows for forking and modifications, without any requirement to contribute these changes back. This sentence is true

> Software released under an MIT license allows for forking and modifications, without any requirement to contribute these changes back. This sentence is true but a bit confusing, because there are no licenses that require anyone to contribute changes back upstream.

hoistbypetard 2y ago
A bit. There are licenses that require people to publish their changes, though, and that is almost certainly what the poster meant.
- Zambyte 2y ago
  No there aren't. You can make changes to AGPLv3 software without publishing it anywhere. The only requirement is that you make your changes available in source form to anyone that you distribute changes to, which may be entirely private, or involve no one besides yourself.
  - hoistbypetard 2y ago
    The AGPL requires that your publish your source to the people who use your software over the network.
    - Zambyte 2y ago
      The AGPL requires that you publish a notice that the source is available on demand to the people who use your software over the network. The easiest way to do this is usually to just publish your changes so you can link everyone to it, but that is not a requirement of the license. You can run derivative AGPLv3 software to service the public without distributing your changes to the source code without violating the license as long as nobody asks for the code.
      - hoistbypetard 2y ago
        From the text of the AGPL: > The GNU Affero General Public License is designed specifically to ensure that, in such cases, the modified source code becomes available to the community. It requires the operator of a network server to provide the source code of the modified version running there to the users of that server. Therefore, public use of a modified version, on a publicly accessible server, gives the public access to the source code of the modified version. If you're interpreting that as something different than "publish", I think you're splitting hairs.
        Zambyte 2y ago
        That's not in the terms of the license, that's in the preamble as a stated goal. Read sections 4-6. They're not that long and don't really have much legalese. In practice, the goal is met because someone is likely to request the source for AGPL software. Publishing the code is not a requirement of the license though.
xaerise 2y ago
To provide changes upstream, the maintainer must accept the change. Most opensource licenses are that you are required to publish your changes. But not upstream. As you wrote, there is no license that forces any "pull requests". The MIT license is the "easiest" license because there are no responsibility for the maintainer..
- Zambyte 2y ago
  > Most opensource licenses are that you are required to publish your changes This isn't true either. You can privately fork AGPLv3 software without violating the license. You only have to provide the source (on demand!) to people who you provide the software to in executable form (where "executable form" includes network based access to the services executing the software in the case of the AGPL).
  - pabs3 2y ago
    ... and the network access clause is only triggered when you modify the software.

hoistbypetard 2y ago

A bit. There are licenses that require people to publish their changes, though, and that is almost certainly what the poster meant.

Zambyte 2y ago
No there aren't. You can make changes to AGPLv3 software without publishing it anywhere. The only requirement is that you make your changes available in source form to anyone that you distribute changes to, which may be entirely private, or involve no one besides yourself.
- hoistbypetard 2y ago
  The AGPL requires that your publish your source to the people who use your software over the network.
  - Zambyte 2y ago
    The AGPL requires that you publish a notice that the source is available on demand to the people who use your software over the network. The easiest way to do this is usually to just publish your changes so you can link everyone to it, but that is not a requirement of the license. You can run derivative AGPLv3 software to service the public without distributing your changes to the source code without violating the license as long as nobody asks for the code.
    - hoistbypetard 2y ago
      From the text of the AGPL: > The GNU Affero General Public License is designed specifically to ensure that, in such cases, the modified source code becomes available to the community. It requires the operator of a network server to provide the source code of the modified version running there to the users of that server. Therefore, public use of a modified version, on a publicly accessible server, gives the public access to the source code of the modified version. If you're interpreting that as something different than "publish", I think you're splitting hairs.
      - Zambyte 2y ago
        That's not in the terms of the license, that's in the preamble as a stated goal. Read sections 4-6. They're not that long and don't really have much legalese. In practice, the goal is met because someone is likely to request the source for AGPL software. Publishing the code is not a requirement of the license though.

xaerise 2y ago

To provide changes upstream, the maintainer must accept the change. Most opensource licenses are that you are required to publish your changes. But not upstream. As you wrote, there is no license that forces any "pull requests". The MIT license is the "easiest" license because there are no responsibility for the maintainer..

Zambyte 2y ago
> Most opensource licenses are that you are required to publish your changes This isn't true either. You can privately fork AGPLv3 software without violating the license. You only have to provide the source (on demand!) to people who you provide the software to in executable form (where "executable form" includes network based access to the services executing the software in the case of the AGPL).
- pabs3 2y ago
  ... and the network access clause is only triggered when you modify the software.