3 ms·
I think of it as an insurance policy. If I release my server side code as agpl, I know that anyone who uses it also has to share the code in their servers has t
by minot 11y ago
I think of it as an insurance policy. If I release my server side code as agpl, I know that anyone who uses it also has to share the code in their servers has to share it with their users.
In my simple mind, open source is a developer construct while free software is a user construct. Thank you for bringing a user's perspective in explaining GPL.
- cmsj 11y agoFWIW, I tend to substitute the word "user" there, for "software". I see permissive Open Source licenses as giving developers all the freedom, and copyleft licenses as giving the software itself, all the freedom. I choose this distinction only because some users are developers, and a copyleft license specifically restricts them from doing some things (i.e. closed source forks), thus restricting their absolute freedom. Instead, the software itself is promoted to the receiver of ultimate freedom, because its basic rights are enforced through all its generations/forks/integrations.