People who use GPLv3 want the code to stay open/libre under any circumstances. If this is the goal, why not use the AGPL instead, even for applications which are not served over a network?

This takes away the possibility that people integrate parts of your program into a proprietary network application, even if this seems improbable. There’s nothing to loose with using this license, but potentially some gain.

Only reason I can think of is that AGPL is less known and trusted which may harm adoption.

  • rbn@feddit.ch
    15·
    1 year ago

    Some time ago a client of me was looking for a solution to add watermarks to PDF files from their local on premise ERP system. The ERP system itself is a standard software. Obviously, they have a license to use that ERP but they definitely do not own the source code of it. Thus, they cannot change the license to AGPL or integrate it somehow.

    I thought about writing a little plugin with Java in iFile to do that which is published unser AGPL. Using something under AGPL would mean that we have to make the entire solution available under that license.

    Question 1: What is the entire solution in that scenario?

    • Is it the part of the plugin that deals with watermarks?
    • Is it the entire PDF handling plugin?
    • Is it the entire process in the ERP system?
    • Is it the entire ERP system that calls the plugin?
    • Would it include sattelite systems that are connected to that ERP system that indirectly use the PDFs and thus potentially ‘infest’ the entire IT landscape?
    • If the PDFs are send automatically to business partners of my client and they process it internally in their systems, are their systems now part of the solution?

    Question 2: AGPL says users must have access to the source code of the solution no matter if they use it locally, over network etc. But Who is the user in such a scenario?

    • The IT department of my client?
    • The end users of the ERP system of my client who are only interested in the PDF but definitely not in the source code?
    • Everyone at my client?
    • Including business partners who might have access to the PDFs?
    • Everyone?

    Question 3: My client is not a software company, so they never published ANY source code or software. Where would you publish the code?

    • The plugin for PDF creation would be called only in the background. The frontend is only standard ERP so I couldn’t easily put a link to the source code in the GUI.
    • My client’s intranet?
    • My client’s homepage?
    • GitHub or a similar platform?

    There is a lot of uncertainty when using AGPL software in a business context which will - in many cases - lead to the decision not to use the software at all.

      • linuxPIPEpower@discuss.tchncs.de
        13·
        1 year ago

        @rbn@feddit.ch made a well structured comment using bullet points. It can be read pretty quickly but I guess the tldr is the last line:

        There is a lot of uncertainty when using AGPL software in a business context which will - in many cases - lead to the decision not to use the software at all.

        if you want to know why you have to spend 20 seconds reading the preceding text.

      • patsw
        3·
        1 year ago

        Both GPL and AGPL are open software liceneses which create an obligation on people who “publish” the binary. (“Publish” is a term of art here.) The difference is when the obligation is triggered: In the case of AGPL it adds the obligation when a modified version is used over a network to provide the source code of the modified version running there to the users of that server. Therefore, the mere public use of a modified version, on a publicly accessible server, gives the public access to the source code of the modified version of the AGPL licensed software.