This isn’t true for software that runs on a server, right? The GPL only forces you to give the source to users who are actually running your software. So I guess Discourse being GPL might force people running publicly-accessible modified instances to give back contributions to the JS code at best (it runs on the user’s machine), but not the server code. That would require AGPL. Is the JS part the original reasoning behind choosing GPL? Because otherwise it’s basically the same as choosing an MIT license.
obvio171
14
Tópicos relacionados
| Tópico | Respostas | Visualizações | Atividade | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Does the use of private plugins breach the terms of the GNU GPL v2? | 18 | 6448 | 23 de Junho de 2017 | |
| GPL license for modified discourse for own website | 9 | 930 | 22 de Março de 2020 | |
| A question on GPL licensing and the current WordPress debacle | 15 | 10291 | 19 de Novembro de 2022 | |
| Are paid plugins with undisclosed license allowed to exist on meta? | 28 | 4725 | 30 de Agosto de 2017 | |
| How can I tell if a particular distribution of the Discourse client is free software? | 39 | 1145 | 19 de Novembro de 2024 |