Proposal for license change to AGPL (please respond before 10 Nov if you care)

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Proposal for license change to AGPL (please respond before 10 Nov if you care)

wvengen
Administrator

Dear Foodsoft developers,

For a while now an issue has been open to move Foodsoft's license from the GPL to the AGPL. Since Foodsoft provides a web service, the real benefits of the GPL are only available in the AGPL, where also hosting Foodsoft requires sharing the source code (the GPL requires that only for redistribution).

Because the AGPL is just a bit more strict than the GPL, there is no developer consent needed to make this change, as far as I understood (everything allowed within the AGPL is allowed within the GPL).

For configuration changes, I'd like to make an exception, so that people experimenting with 'stock' Foodsoft do not need to setup a server to host their source code. This makes it easier for new installations to get started. Any real code changes will need to be published.

Please see foodsoft#496 for more information.


Proposal

1. Replace GPL with AGPL

2. Mark config/app_config.yml, config/database.yml and config/environments/* as public domain.

3. Add a note to the README for people somewhat newer to licensing:

Foodsoft is licensed under the AGPL license (version 3 or later). Practically this means that you are free to use, adapt and redistribute the software, as long as you publish any changes you make to the code.

For private use, there are no restrictions, but if you give others access to Foodsoft (like running it open to the internet), you must also share your changes under the same license. This can be as easy as forking the project on Github.

To make it a little easier, configuration files are exempt, so you can just install and configure Foodsoft without having to publish your changes. These files are marked as public domain in the file header.

If you have any remaining questions, please open an issue or contact the mailing list.


Questions to you

1. Are you ok with this?
2. Will you be happy to release any future contributions under the AGPL?
3. Was anything missed?

This question is open for 2 more weeks, until the 10th of November.

Kind regards,
- Willem

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposal for license change to AGPL (please respond before 10 Nov if you care)

carchrae
no problem by me.  however, you may want to make it clear that people should publish their changes rather than commit them back. I have a lot of improvements I made and have them on my own fork ( on GitHub) because I have not had the time to make a good pr.  encourage contributions but not force rushed merge to the main code.

but of course enforcing licencing isn't going to work unless you have lawyers. it may deter, but would be expensive to enforce. so, while I agree with keeping legal in terms of the spirit you wish to maintain, best mode to encourage is being positive (carrot instead of stick)

I would really like to fix the ux in the whole app. some parts are really poorly designed (for the user). not a small project though, and like many of us, a volunteer effort outside the day job.

thanks for all your efforts willem.

Tom




On Oct 27, 2017 7:17 AM, "wvengen [via foodsoft]" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear Foodsoft developers,

For a while now an issue has been open to move Foodsoft's license from the GPL to the AGPL. Since Foodsoft provides a web service, the real benefits of the GPL are only available in the AGPL, where also hosting Foodsoft requires sharing the source code (the GPL requires that only for redistribution).

Because the AGPL is just a bit more strict than the GPL, there is no developer consent needed to make this change, as far as I understood (everything allowed within the AGPL is allowed within the GPL).

For configuration changes, I'd like to make an exception, so that people experimenting with 'stock' Foodsoft do not need to setup a server to host their source code. This makes it easier for new installations to get started. Any real code changes will need to be published.

Please see foodsoft#496 for more information.


Proposal

1. Replace GPL with AGPL

2. Mark config/app_config.yml, config/database.yml and config/environments/* as public domain.

3. Add a note to the README for people somewhat newer to licensing:

Foodsoft is licensed under the AGPL license (version 3 or later). Practically this means that you are free to use, adapt and redistribute the software, as long as you publish any changes you make to the code.

For private use, there are no restrictions, but if you give others access to Foodsoft (like running it open to the internet), you must also share your changes under the same license. This can be as easy as forking the project on Github.

To make it a little easier, configuration files are exempt, so you can just install and configure Foodsoft without having to publish your changes. These files are marked as public domain in the file header.

If you have any remaining questions, please open an issue or contact the mailing list.


Questions to you

1. Are you ok with this?
2. Will you be happy to release any future contributions under the AGPL?
3. Was anything missed?

This question is open for 2 more weeks, until the 10th of November.

Kind regards,
- Willem




To unsubscribe from foodsoft-dev, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposal for license change to AGPL (please respond before 10 Nov if you care)

wvengen
Administrator

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your reply. I would change the explanation to something like the following:

Foodsoft is licensed under the AGPL license (version 3 or later). Practically this means that you are free to use, adapt and redistribute the software, as long as you publish any changes you make to the code.

For private use, there are no restrictions, but if you give others access to Foodsoft (like running it open to the internet), you must also make your changes available under the same license. This can be as easy as forking the project on Github and pushing your changes. You don't have to integrate your changes back into the main Foodsoft version (but if you're up for it that would be very welcome).

To make it a little easier, configuration files are exempt, so you can just install and configure Foodsoft without having to publish your changes. These files are marked as public domain in the file header.

If you have any remaining questions, please open an issue or contact the mailing list.

Regarding UX, I fully agree that there is quite a lot of room for improvement. I'm working (on and off) on a new member ordering interface in foodsoft-shop, and would like to improve things step by step. If you have ideas (even like rough sketches), feel free to create an issue or share them on the list. Many little bits can still bring us somewhere. And I'm already very happy that Foodsoft sees use around the world.

Best regards,
- Willem


On 27-10-17 16:44, carchrae [via foodsoft] wrote:
no problem by me.  however, you may want to make it clear that people should publish their changes rather than commit them back. I have a lot of improvements I made and have them on my own fork ( on GitHub) because I have not had the time to make a good pr.  encourage contributions but not force rushed merge to the main code.

but of course enforcing licencing isn't going to work unless you have lawyers. it may deter, but would be expensive to enforce. so, while I agree with keeping legal in terms of the spirit you wish to maintain, best mode to encourage is being positive (carrot instead of stick)

I would really like to fix the ux in the whole app. some parts are really poorly designed (for the user). not a small project though, and like many of us, a volunteer effort outside the day job.

thanks for all your efforts willem.

Tom


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposal for license change to AGPL (please respond before 10 Nov if you care)

Julius
Just a comment on the wording:

> You don't have to integrate your changes back into the main Foodsoft
> version (but if you're up for it that would be very welcome).

Maybe this should read: "You do not need to integrate..." or "You are
not required to integrate...".

Regards,
Julius
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposal for license change to AGPL (please respond before 10 Nov if you care)

wvengen
Administrator

Thanks, Julius. New text:

Foodsoft is licensed under the AGPL license (version 3 or later). Practically this means that you are free to use, adapt and redistribute the software, as long as you publish any changes you make to the code.

For private use, there are no restrictions, but if you give others access to Foodsoft (like running it open to the internet), you must also make your changes available under the same license. This can be as easy as forking the project on Github and pushing your changes. You are not required to integrate your changes back into the main Foodsoft version (but if you're up for it that would be very welcome).

To make it a little easier, configuration files are exempt, so you can just install and configure Foodsoft without having to publish your changes. These files are marked as public domain in the file header.

If you have any remaining questions, please open an issue or contact the mailing list.


- Willem