[DiscordArchive] Licensing...like some requirement to open source everything or does it get weirder?
[DiscordArchive] Licensing...like some requirement to open source everything or does it get weirder?
Original source
Respectfully Rym this is so well documented and covered by both AC themselves and outside experts whose sole job is to look into this stuff there’s no debate.
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:01 AM #21Archived author: Deleted User • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:01:53.469000+00:00
Original source
Respectfully Rym this is so well documented and covered by both AC themselves and outside experts whose sole job is to look into this stuff there’s no debate.
Original source
i dont want to spend another day on AC license topic so long story short
1. AC changed license to agpl which is invalid they didnt have approval by TC contributors
2. AC went on for years and mislead its contributors to think that they are committing under agpl
3. all code committed to AC is actually under original TC license
4. AC contributors are in right in sense to expect their code to be AGPL since they were committing it under that believe
conclusion is that only way to resolve this mess is to inform all AC contributors that this is how it was and ask them if they want their code to be removed now that they know its not AGPL (bcs they may want it to be there only if it was AGPL) and after doing this remove whole AC license and revert it back to TC license
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:05 AM #22Archived author: Rymercyble • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:05:33.400000+00:00
Original source
i dont want to spend another day on AC license topic so long story short
1. AC changed license to agpl which is invalid they didnt have approval by TC contributors
2. AC went on for years and mislead its contributors to think that they are committing under agpl
3. all code committed to AC is actually under original TC license
4. AC contributors are in right in sense to expect their code to be AGPL since they were committing it under that believe
conclusion is that only way to resolve this mess is to inform all AC contributors that this is how it was and ask them if they want their code to be removed now that they know its not AGPL (bcs they may want it to be there only if it was AGPL) and after doing this remove whole AC license and revert it back to TC license
Original source
Sorry but you’ve fundamentally misunderstood how the AGPL works and why this is an issue.
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:05 AM #23Archived author: Deleted User • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:05:59.427000+00:00
Original source
Sorry but you’ve fundamentally misunderstood how the AGPL works and why this is an issue.
Original source
AC can’t “just revert back”. Thats the entire point.
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:06 AM #24Archived author: Deleted User • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:06:10.332000+00:00
Original source
AC can’t “just revert back”. Thats the entire point.
Original source
i included steps necessary for that to be possible
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:06 AM #25Archived author: Rymercyble • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:06:39.904000+00:00
Original source
i included steps necessary for that to be possible
Original source
AC can’t revert licenses. As an organisation. Only each individual contributor for each thing they submitted. AC didn’t want to go back X many years to try and do that, understandably it’s almost impossible. So files can’t just be changed back adhoc.
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:07 AM #26Archived author: Deleted User • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:07:35.130000+00:00
Original source
AC can’t revert licenses. As an organisation. Only each individual contributor for each thing they submitted. AC didn’t want to go back X many years to try and do that, understandably it’s almost impossible. So files can’t just be changed back adhoc.
Original source
You clearly don’t understand the AGPL.
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:08 AM #27Archived author: Deleted User • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:08:04.301000+00:00
Original source
You clearly don’t understand the AGPL.
Original source
what i always dont understand in this discussion is why are ppl behaving in way as if AC license was valid....u cant base argument on invalid thing
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:09 AM #28Archived author: Rymercyble • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:09:26.971000+00:00
Original source
what i always dont understand in this discussion is why are ppl behaving in way as if AC license was valid....u cant base argument on invalid thing
Original source
> understandably it's almost impossible
Well sure, but huge projects (e.g. Mozilla) have gone through that and gotten as many people as they could to relicense what was contributed
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:09 AM #29Archived author: Bench • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:09:30.759000+00:00
Original source
> understandably it's almost impossible
Well sure, but huge projects (e.g. Mozilla) have gone through that and gotten as many people as they could to relicense what was contributed
Original source
The one thing that AC did which they could reverse was they started applying the AGPL header to files already existing in TC / Mangos that were GPL3. So those were invalid. And were reverted.
rektbyfaith
05-08-2024, 03:09 AM #30Archived author: Deleted User • Posted: 2024-05-08T03:09:31.764000+00:00
Original source
The one thing that AC did which they could reverse was they started applying the AGPL header to files already existing in TC / Mangos that were GPL3. So those were invalid. And were reverted.
1 Guest(s)
1 Guest(s)