After some consideration with people who understand licenses better than myself, I've opted to keep the current MIT license - GPL would make it challenging to still keep integrations that rely on non-open dependencies in the same repo, and AGPL would make it challenging even to keep them in a separate non-free repo and then combine them and run them together as a service.

In the future I may consider an Apache License, but for now I'm happy with MIT - also because I don't care much of the patent protection schemes offered by the Apache License, as I don't believe in software patents being a useful thing anyway.

See responses [on this thread](https://manganiello.social/@fabio/posts/AgFRioPiXLxoyx9kI4). After some consideration with people who understand licenses better than myself, I've opted to keep the current MIT license - GPL would make it challenging to still keep integrations that rely on non-open dependencies in the same repo, and AGPL would make it challenging even to keep them in a separate non-free repo and then combine them and run them together as a service. In the future I may consider an Apache License, but for now I'm happy with MIT - also because I don't care much of the patent protection schemes offered by the Apache License, as I don't believe in software patents being a useful thing anyway.

blacklight closed this issue

2024-03-27 16:18:49 +01:00

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference

platypush/platypush#379

No description provided.

Rows
Columns