Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Those are the same reasons for why I avoid AGPL (and GPL frankly, because I dont want to make my frontend code fully open source either). I always thought that when a project is AGPL then I might as well consider it off limits for myself because if any of my code is touching it and then that code indirectly eventually reaches users via the network then wouldn't that also mean that I have to open source everything? I mean otherwise you could just put any AGPL software behind a proxy and you'd be instantly fine which I don't think that's how it works. In an ideal world we would have a license where you're required to open source only the changes you make to the 3rd party code, not everything that surrounds it and without restrictions on linking or network. But I guess that is too hard to enforce.


> In an ideal world we would have a license where you're required to open source only the changes you make to the 3rd party code, not everything that surrounds it

Good news! That license mostly exists: it’s called AGPL.

The one where you have to open source “everything” (not really everything, but close to it) is SSPL [1], but that requirement only applies in certain circumstances.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Side_Public_License




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: