Relicensing #632

Closed
opened 7 months ago by prologic · 5 comments
Owner

To further break in the New Year (2022) let's kick-start off a discussion around licensing. We've had this discussion before informally, let's do it again (for the record) and make a decision.

In the best interests of Yarn.social, the software components, the services and the specs. I would like to propose the following:

  • All software components be licensed as AGPLv3
  • All documentation and speficiations as either Creative Commons or simialr.
  • All reference clients, tools, scripts, etc as MIT or BSD 2-clause.

The primary motivation for this is to protect what we've built from bad actors that may abuse the hard work and effort we've put into this for their own selfish (usually financially motivated) interests as well as to actively encourage contributinos and improvements back upstream.

Please provide feedback, your thoughts and comments or concerns.

To further break in the New Year (2022) let's kick-start off a discussion around licensing. We've had this discussion before informally, let's do it again (_for the record_) and make a decision. In the best interests of [Yarn.social](https://yarn.social), the software components, the services and the specs. I would like to propose the following: - All software components be licensed as AGPLv3 - All documentation and speficiations as either Creative Commons or simialr. - All reference clients, tools, scripts, etc as MIT or BSD 2-clause. The primary motivation for this is to protect what we've built from bad actors that may abuse the hard work and effort we've put into this for their own selfish (_usually financially motivated_) interests as well as to actively encourage contributinos and improvements back upstream. Please provide feedback, your thoughts and comments or concerns.
prologic added the
discussion
label 7 months ago
Poster
Owner
cc @antonio @xuu @jlj @markwylde @sorenpeter @lyse @ullarah @movq
Owner

Sounds good James. I use the AGPLv3 for any server projects I build. My understanding, is that:

  • everything's still open source
  • anyone can use it for anything
  • any changes must be made available to end users
    • even if running on a server somewhere

With GPL, you could fork a project, make changes to it, and so long as you're the only one running it, you don't have to keep the changes.

This would mean a huge corporation could fork the project, make really cool changes, host the project for their own clients, and not have to release the source code.

I like that the AGPL still allows them to fork the project, but any additions/changes/improvements/(regressions?) have to be made available.

The other two, creative commons, MIT, BSD is all good with me. I follow something similar for generic/utility libraries.

Sounds good James. I use the AGPLv3 for any server projects I build. My understanding, is that: - everything's still open source - anyone can use it for anything - any changes must be made available to end users - even if running on a server somewhere With GPL, you could fork a project, make changes to it, and so long as you're the only one running it, you don't have to keep the changes. This would mean a huge corporation could fork the project, make really cool changes, host the project for their own clients, and not have to release the source code. I like that the AGPL still allows them to fork the project, but any additions/changes/improvements/(regressions?) have to be made available. The other two, creative commons, MIT, BSD is all good with me. I follow something similar for generic/utility libraries.
Owner

Actually, I don't have a strong opinion on that matter, unlike on other subjects. I don't care about the license (change), I'm fine with any.

(Edited, to clarify and not sounding so rude anymore.)

Actually, I don't have a strong opinion on that matter, unlike on other subjects. I don't care about the license (change), I'm fine with any. (Edited, to clarify and not sounding so rude anymore.)
Owner

Thumbs up from me! 👍

I generally use MIT for my stuff, because my programs are usually tiny and not popular anyway, but for larger projects (which could get popular or were a lot of work for me), I think that choosing GPL is a very good idea, because – as you said – it protects the code better from bad actors. And for server-side stuff, yeah, let’s go for AGPL. 👍

Thumbs up from me! 👍 I generally use MIT for my stuff, because my programs are usually tiny and not popular anyway, but for larger projects (which *could* get popular or were *a lot of work* for me), I think that choosing GPL is a very good idea, because – as you said – it protects the code better from bad actors. And for server-side stuff, yeah, let’s go for AGPL. 👍
prologic added the
documentation
label 7 months ago
Poster
Owner

This is done for the main codebase. Other repos will follow suit.

This is done for the main codebase. Other repos will follow suit.
prologic closed this issue 6 months ago
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Milestone
No Assignees
4 Participants
Notifications
Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: yarnsocial/yarn#632
Loading…
There is no content yet.