[devrandomguy]

+1 for keeping the [A]GPL. As I understand it, the CRUD service that backs this would be separate software, which only communicates with this editor through an API, so it would not be affected by ORY's license.

If ORY was a full stack content editing service, rather than just a client with a demo server, then you could still run it unmodified, making it easy to share the source (just link to the official repo). Your other services could either operate on the data being saved by ORY-service, or communicate with it via an HTTP API (whose implementation would be an open component of the ORY-service). But once again, your own software would not fall under the AGPL, because they do not extend, or trivially wrap, ORY.

The only way an AGPL license would force a user of ORY to share their own code, would be if they forked ORY and extended its own codebase, or wrapped it in a trivial adaptor for some framework or platform, e.g. a Wordpress plugin.

IANAL, and the AGPL is a long read, but I do feel like I understood it, and could use this alongside closed-source services.

[btown]

Some of your assumptions may not hold in this case: see my thoughts at https://github.com/ory/editor/issues/392