Pierre BourdonAug 16, 2024

Hot take, don't @ me: AGPL should never have been an OSI approved license.

The license is basically a compliance trap, and I would posit that > 99% of modified AGPL software violates the license.

This leads to a world where license enforcement is entirely up to arbitrary decisions by the copyright owner. Any contributor to an AGPL software package (without CLA) can go and mass-send C&Ds and/or request $$$, kind of like the Creative Commons copyright trolls have been doing for CC-BY violations.

Show threadScreechingBagelAug 16, 2024
@delroth cant you just provide your modified source code on request? i don’t think there’s a responsibility to be specifically hosting it?
Show threadPierre BourdonAug 16, 2024
@bagel no, that's not how the AGPL works, you should go read the license and the associated FAQ
Show threadScreechingBagel
@delroth oh apologies, i see

“…an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software.”
Aug 16, 2024 at 4:07pmWeb
Show threadPierre BourdonAug 16, 2024

@bagel and the previous part of the sentence is even more key imo:

"if you modify the Program, your modified version **must** prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network [...]"

(emphasis mine)