3 ms·
Sure, that's your prerogative, and kudos for not talking up open source. I'm not amazon size so can't use it, and AGPL is a no go for DB, don't want to be force
by cognitiveinline 2mo ago
Sure, that's your prerogative, and kudos for not talking up open source. I'm not amazon size so can't use it, and AGPL is a no go for DB, don't want to be forced to open source my app because I use this!
Will await a MIT based fork myself.
- jnwatson 2mo agoWhy would AGPL force you to open source your app? Unless you literally compile your app with pgrust by modifying the pgrust source code, you're safe. Clients aren't bound by the AGPL because they aren't derived works.
- xyzzy_plugh 2mo agoHere we go again. AGPL is untested in courts. There is no definitive definition of what could be considered within the blast radius such that it would require AGPL licensing. There's a reason AGPL is banned at Google and most sane companies. It's simply too dangerous. You can't simply say "clients aren't bound" because it depends. I'd rather see the BSL used here to be perfectly honest. At least it's simple.
- jnwatson 2mo agoWhile the AGPL is untested, what a derived work is is less so. It is entirely outside the bounds of the intentions of the authors of the AGPL for clients to be infected.