Can I host a project on Google's Project Hosting, if it's licensed
under AGPL? It's one of FSF's licenses. I really need AGPL instead of
GPL, as my project is a server-side software.
It would be nice if Google could add AGPL to the list of available
licenses.
My project is protected by AGPL, but I've selected GPL in the
interface, due to the lack of AGPL. Please let me know whether I
can keep my project if it's AGPL or whether I should remove it.
In fact we do not support the AGPL on code.google.com. We are actively trying to fight the proliferation of licenses that are considered open source and the AGPL both has very little market share and has not been certified as being open source by the OSI.
It is also not okay to host an AGPL covered program on code.google.com by saying it is GPL, as you are telling the users of the site one thing, while meaning something else altogether. So sadly, the answer is to remove your project and host somewhere else like sf or savannah.
Thanks.
Chris
On Nov 25, 2007 8:20 AM, Rhywek <Rhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can I host a project on Google's Project Hosting, if it's licensed > under AGPL? It's one of FSF's licenses. I really need AGPL instead of > GPL, as my project is a server-side software.
> It would be nice if Google could add AGPL to the list of available > licenses.
> My project is protected by AGPL, but I've selected GPL in the > interface, due to the lack of AGPL. Please let me know whether I > can keep my project if it's AGPL or whether I should remove it.
-- Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc. Google's Open Source and Developer programs can be found at http://code.google.com Personal Site and Weblog: http://dibona.com
On Nov 25, 7:54 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote:
> It is also not okay to host anAGPLcovered program on code.google.com
> by saying it is GPL, as you are telling the users of the site one
> thing, while meaning something else altogether. So sadly, the answer
> is to remove your project and host somewhere else like sf or savannah.
OK, thanks for the info. I'll remove the project as soon as possible.
Could you reveal whether there are plans for adding any affero-style
license in a foreseeable future?
We have no current plans to do so. If AGPL adoption is high enough to warrant it, we'll revisit. The question is this: Who will propose the AGPL to the OSI? :-)
Chris
On Nov 25, 2007 12:52 PM, Rhywek <Rhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 25, 7:54 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote: > > It is also not okay to host anAGPLcovered program on code.google.com > > by saying it is GPL, as you are telling the users of the site one > > thing, while meaning something else altogether. So sadly, the answer > > is to remove your project and host somewhere else like sf or savannah.
> OK, thanks for the info. I'll remove the project as soon as possible.
> Could you reveal whether there are plans for adding any affero-style > license in a foreseeable future?
-- Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc. Google's Open Source and Developer programs can be found at http://code.google.com Personal Site and Weblog: http://dibona.com
On Nov 25, 10:38 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote:
> We have no current plans to do so. IfAGPLadoption is high enough to
> warrant it, we'll revisit. The question is this: Who will propose theAGPLto the OSI? :-)
Free Software Foundation is the highest authority when it comes to
free software and its licensing. So FSF asking OSI to approve their
licenses would be like my father asking me how to make children.
Those few variations of GPL released by FSF should be really supported
by Google's project hosting as soon as they are released. Here's why:
Hosting providers will allow AGPL projects if AGPL adoption is high.
But for the adoption to get high developers must first be able to make
their projects AGPL. But to do so, hosting providers must allow AGPL
projects. And the cycle closes.
No need for the lecture, I submitted the gpl to osi myself and I understand the politics. It's easy to get worked up with this stuff, but this is also incredibly unproductive for GPL/AGPL proejcts to take this approach to other open source licenses as tehre is a -lot- of code under apache and bsd that can and has enrich gpl/agpl projects.
Chris
On Nov 26, 2007 2:06 PM, Rhywek <Rhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 25, 10:38 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote: > > We have no current plans to do so. IfAGPLadoption is high enough to > > warrant it, we'll revisit. The question is this: Who will propose theAGPLto the OSI? :-)
> Free Software Foundation is the highest authority when it comes to > free software and its licensing. So FSF asking OSI to approve their > licenses would be like my father asking me how to make children.
> Those few variations of GPL released by FSF should be really supported > by Google's project hosting as soon as they are released. Here's why: > Hosting providers will allow AGPL projects if AGPL adoption is high. > But for the adoption to get high developers must first be able to make > their projects AGPL. But to do so, hosting providers must allow AGPL > projects. And the cycle closes.
> Best regards, > Rhywek.
-- Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc. Google's Open Source and Developer programs can be found at http://code.google.com Personal Site and Weblog: http://dibona.com
On Nov 26, 11:10 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote:
> No need for the lecture, I submitted the gpl to osi myself and I
> understand the politics. It's easy to get worked up with this stuff,
> but this is also incredibly unproductive for GPL/AGPLproejcts to take
> this approach to other open source licenses as tehre is a -lot- of
> code under apache and bsd that can and has enrich gpl/agplprojects.
I'm sorry if I was too direct when expressing my personal opinion. It
really wasn't supposed to sound like a lecture. I just wanted to
contribute to the discussion with my personal viewpoint. :-)
I would also like AGPL to be available for google code projects. How
can we help make this happen? If having myself make a osi request as
well would help, what is the link?
Thanks,
- Ben
On Nov 27, 7:10 am, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote:
> No need for the lecture, I submitted the gpl to osi myself and I
> understand the politics. It's easy to get worked up with this stuff,
> but this is also incredibly unproductive for GPL/AGPL proejcts to take
> this approach to other open source licenses as tehre is a -lot- of
> code under apache and bsd that can and has enrich gpl/agpl projects.
> Chris
> On Nov 26, 2007 2:06 PM, Rhywek <Rhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 25, 10:38 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote:
> > > We have no current plans to do so. IfAGPLadoption is high enough to
> > > warrant it, we'll revisit. The question is this: Who will propose theAGPLto the OSI? :-)
> > Free Software Foundation is the highest authority when it comes to
> > free software and its licensing. So FSF asking OSI to approve their
> > licenses would be like my father asking me how to make children.
> > Those few variations of GPL released by FSF should be really supported
> > by Google's project hosting as soon as they are released. Here's why:
> > Hosting providers will allow AGPL projects if AGPL adoption is high.
> > But for the adoption to get high developers must first be able to make
> > their projects AGPL. But to do so, hosting providers must allow AGPL
> > projects. And the cycle closes.
> > Best regards,
> > Rhywek.
> --
> Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc.
> Google's Open Source and Developer programs can be found athttp://code.google.com > Personal Site and Weblog:http://dibona.com
It would help, but what really matters is that the license is adopted. So far, we haven't seen much of it. (Unless things have changed substantively in the last month)
Chris
On Dec 30, 2007 10:03 AM, balupton <balup...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would also like AGPL to be available for google code projects. How > can we help make this happen? If having myself make a osi request as > well would help, what is the link?
> Thanks, > - Ben
> On Nov 27, 7:10 am, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote: > > No need for the lecture, I submitted the gpl to osi myself and I > > understand the politics. It's easy to get worked up with this stuff, > > but this is also incredibly unproductive for GPL/AGPL proejcts to take > > this approach to other open source licenses as tehre is a -lot- of > > code under apache and bsd that can and has enrich gpl/agpl projects.
> > Chris
> > On Nov 26, 2007 2:06 PM, Rhywek <Rhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Nov 25, 10:38 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote: > > > > We have no current plans to do so. IfAGPLadoption is high enough to > > > > warrant it, we'll revisit. The question is this: Who will propose > theAGPLto the OSI? :-)
> > > Free Software Foundation is the highest authority when it comes to > > > free software and its licensing. So FSF asking OSI to approve their > > > licenses would be like my father asking me how to make children.
> > > Those few variations of GPL released by FSF should be really supported > > > by Google's project hosting as soon as they are released. Here's why: > > > Hosting providers will allow AGPL projects if AGPL adoption is high. > > > But for the adoption to get high developers must first be able to make > > > their projects AGPL. But to do so, hosting providers must allow AGPL > > > projects. And the cycle closes.
> > > Best regards, > > > Rhywek.
> > -- > > Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc. > > Google's Open Source and Developer programs can be found > athttp://code.google.com > > Personal Site and Weblog:http://dibona.com
-- Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc. Google's Open Source and Developer programs can be found at http://code.google.com Personal Site and Weblog: http://dibona.com
What kind of adoption would be high enough for you to consider adding
it as an option? We love our Google project hosting (especially with
the improved svn code browsing features) but we are considering
switching to the AGPL and really don't want to switch project hosts. :-
(
Justin
On Dec 30 2007, 3:31 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote:
> It would help, but what really matters is that the license is adopted. So
> far, we haven't seen much of it. (Unless things have changed substantively
> in the last month)
> Chris
> On Dec 30, 2007 10:03 AM, balupton <balup...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I would also like AGPL to be available for google code projects. How
> > can we help make this happen? If having myself make a osi request as
> > well would help, what is the link?
> > Thanks,
> > - Ben
> > On Nov 27, 7:10 am, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote:
> > > No need for the lecture, I submitted the gpl to osi myself and I
> > > understand the politics. It's easy to get worked up with this stuff,
> > > but this is also incredibly unproductive for GPL/AGPL proejcts to take
> > > this approach to other open source licenses as tehre is a -lot- of
> > > code under apache and bsd that can and has enrich gpl/agpl projects.
> > > Chris
> > > On Nov 26, 2007 2:06 PM, Rhywek <Rhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Nov 25, 10:38 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > > We have no current plans to do so. IfAGPLadoption is high enough to
> > > > > warrant it, we'll revisit. The question is this: Who will propose
> > theAGPLto the OSI? :-)
> > > > Free Software Foundation is the highest authority when it comes to
> > > > free software and its licensing. So FSF asking OSI to approve their
> > > > licenses would be like my father asking me how to make children.
> > > > Those few variations of GPL released by FSF should be really supported
> > > > by Google's project hosting as soon as they are released. Here's why:
> > > > Hosting providers will allow AGPL projects if AGPL adoption is high.
> > > > But for the adoption to get high developers must first be able to make
> > > > their projects AGPL. But to do so, hosting providers must allow AGPL
> > > > projects. And the cycle closes.
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Rhywek.
> > > --
> > > Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc.
> > > Google's Open Source and Developer programs can be found
> > athttp://code.google.com > > > Personal Site and Weblog:http://dibona.com
> --
> Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc.
> Google's Open Source and Developer programs can be found athttp://code.google.com > Personal Site and Weblog:http://dibona.com
> What kind of adoption would be high enough for you to consider adding > it as an option? We love our Google project hosting (especially with > the improved svn code browsing features) but we are considering > switching to the AGPL and really don't want to switch project hosts. :- > (
> Justin
> On Dec 30 2007, 3:31 pm, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote: > > It would help, but what really matters is that the license is adopted. > So > > far, we haven't seen much of it. (Unless things have changed > substantively > > in the last month)
> > Chris
> > On Dec 30, 2007 10:03 AM, balupton <balup...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I would also like AGPL to be available for google code projects. How > > > can we help make this happen? If having myself make a osi request as > > > well would help, what is the link?
> > > Thanks, > > > - Ben
> > > On Nov 27, 7:10 am, "Chris DiBona" <cdib...@google.com> wrote: > > > > No need for the lecture, I submitted the gpl to osi myself and I > > > > understand the politics. It's easy to get worked up with this stuff, > > > > but this is also incredibly unproductive for GPL/AGPL proejcts to > take > > > > this approach to other open source licenses as tehre is a -lot- of > > > > code under apache and bsd that can and has enrich gpl/agpl projects.
