AllBugsFeaturesChangelogSearchNew post
Sign in with Fluxer
Features

Allow alternative licensing options

(#986) Feature Under consideration meta
by RexSystem edited originally by @ghost on GitHub

Problem

AGPL-3.0 introduces complexity, compatibility concerns, and potential legal liability that many teams and organizations simply can't take on. For those reasons, software under this license carries too much risk for most organizations and teams to consider.

Proposed solution

Offer a dual licensing option, one that allows self-hosting without the AGPL-3.0 obligations while still letting the project maintain its open-source version.

5 comments

Sign in with Fluxer to comment and vote.
Comment by @AstralPhnx
RexSystem 1 vote originally by @AstralPhnx on GitHub 3 replies
The project used to have a CLA for this reasons but due to community feedback the CLA was dropped. As a result, commercial use cases will still need to abide by AGPLv3 and I doubt this will change any time soon
Permalink
Comment by @ghost
RexSystem 1 vote originally by @ghost on GitHub OP
I am fully expecting this to be the case. Cool project, but many cannot use it.
Permalink
Comment by @AstralPhnx
RexSystem 1 vote originally by @AstralPhnx on GitHub
I am fully expecting this to be the case. Cool project, but many cannot use it.
Define "many" because it's very easy to abide by AGPLv3 in a majority of cases
Permalink
Comment by @HeyBanditoz
RexSystem 1 vote originally by @HeyBanditoz on GitHub
Grafana is the most famous example I can immediately think of that's AGPL licensed (with CLA, though) and lots of corporations use it without trouble.
Permalink
Comment by @RaeASunshine
RexSystem 1 vote originally by @RaeASunshine on GitHub
AGPL prevents companies from taking open source code and using it to develop their own projects with it and closing that source. If your goal is to host your own self hosted instance, then AGPL wont get in your way. If your goal is to modify it, then AGPL makes the community better.
Permalink