|
|
|
|
|
|
by no_wizard
1068 days ago
|
|
|
It’s AGPL licensed which is interesting. Much like Redmine this means modifications or customizations are a license violation unless shared correct? I wonder if these licenses are hurting the adoption of OSS alternatives for enterprise software |
|
|
No, AGPL means that if you're using it to provide a network service you must offer the source *to the users*, but not necessarily share it with the world as a whole.
If you use it internally at a company, your modified source must be made available to your internal users. It is not required to be shared with the upstream project or the world as a whole. This is the same as any other GPL software, just with the AGPL network interaction provision.
The only time AGPL requires sharing your modifications with the world is if you're using the AGPL code to provide services to the world.
> I wonder if these licenses are hurting the adoption of OSS alternatives for enterprise software
There are definitely a lot of enterprises that are paranoid about even using anything GPL related, mostly without good reason.
If an organization that doesn't want to even consider sharing their modifications to code they're getting for free avoids using (A)GPL software as a result I think most developers who choose those licenses would say everything is working as intended.