this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2024
17 points (90.5% liked)

Asklemmy

43906 readers
1062 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
17
are agpl3 and gpl3 compatible and can (a)gpl3 use mit / bsd / apache code but mit / bsd / apache cant use (a)gpl3 code? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Doesn't really work that way, I don't think... if you're specifically using agpl, then you don't want people relicensing it as gpl (in particular because that could include Microsoft selling access to a "gpl" version of the project behind an api endpoint or something, and never distributing their source modifications since the gpl doesn't require them to.) I think the gpl-compatible license you're looking for is the gpl.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What's the difference between gpl and agpl?

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)
  • GPL means you can have the software+source for free and make changes to it. But, if you sell or redistribute it (which you can also do), you have to give people the source code with any improvements you made to it also.
  • AGPL is the same, but you also have to give people the source if they're accessing it behind a web service or something (i.e. making use of it without technically "receiving" the underlying software).
[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So aGPL is basically just better gpl.

Why do people mainly use GPL then? Just don't know it exists?

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, no particular reason. Either it was already licensed GPL3 with multiple authors and not enough reason to "upgrade" to justify the difficulty that entails of consulting with everyone, or it's a type of software where there's basically no difference, or they're just not aware of it.