Echo JS 0.11.0

<~>
tracker1 45 days ago. link 1 point
Worth noting that portions of this application are GPL/AGPL meaning you can not create internalized versions that have extensions that are closed source or internalized to your business.

You could create separate (closed services) that are separate and then keep the modifications on the open parts of the UI open in support.

Replies

tracker1 44 days ago. link 1 point
It isn't necessarily a negative, just pointing it out.  A lot of devs work for companies that don't allow (A)GPL, or at least severely limit AGPL specifically depending on the environment.  Was just pointing it out. :-)
evereq 44 days ago. link 2 points
Yep, agree with you :) and appreciate your comments, you are entirely right, and it does limit businesses someway (e.g. compared to MIT based software). I want to point out that it's not only us doing this, that's all ;)

We thought very carefully between MIT and GPL and found that AGPL/GPL is better for us to start with (we can always later release another version as MIT for example). First, we can use inside many other GPL (or even AGPL) licensed libraries and not worry too much about that for now. Second, we want to make sure no company will take our platform and build its own SaaS offering without giving back to the community (and so to us :D). 

So, we think this way:  if we make our platform easy configurable with all required features, someone developing real business will not have issues to use our platform "as is", maybe only changing some UI design/branding/etc and making minimum configurations in Admin UI only (i.e. no code changes). So he will not need to worry about "open-source" back any changes, simply because there will be no changes to open-source :) 

At the same time, if someone decides to build on top of our platform something more complex/complicated, she/he will be "pushed" to open-source that, which makes sense in our view because we spend years on building such a platform and give it to a community for free... So it will not be possible for her/him to get all of the benefits without giving back at least something... 

And finally, for those who will want to keep changes private, we will have later Enterprise edition with completely different licensing terms ;)

Does it make sense in your view?

Btw, https://choosealicense.com/licenses, very good and simple resource for those who want to understand differences between licenses
tracker1 43 days ago. link 1 point
Absolutely... I'm actually surprised more service/database open-source software doesn't start off as AGPL for those reasons (re: MongoDB and Redis changes).  In the end there are pluses and minuses around it all.

Libraries, and especially connecting client libraries for say databases, I feel very differently about and favor MIT or ISC (I like WTFPL, but lawyers don't like the implied lack of warranty and prefer explicit declaration.)