-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
Change License to Apache-2 #488
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
We chose the AGPL to make sure that anyone else using and improving the core components, has to contribute back. I'm not convinced that a more liberal license would really foster the use of metal-stack in a way that we get more contributions, even though they don't need to contribute any longer. |
|
I never understood all the FUD against copyleft licenses... |
It actually prevented one potential contributor to even start using it. |
During the past 7 Years we did not see a single contribution from a outside organisation, mostly because interested parties mostly do not allow their employees to contribute to AGPL licensed projects. In the flip side, other projects in the metal-stack org which are more openly licensed, got a lot of external contributions, most prominent example is https://metal-stack.io/go-ipam. AGPL is currently preventing us to join the metal-stack project to the https://neonephos.org foundation. So please make it possible to: a:) gain more external contributions |
We had AGPL because we wanted to enforce third parties which eventually use also metal-stack to contribute back their enhancements. We did not get any external contributions to metal-api in the past. AGPL is also a forbidden LICENSE for a lot of companies to contribute to which might be the reason why we did not get any. Other repos in our org, which are Apache-2.0 or MIT licensed, did get quite a lot of contributions.
I added a lot of reviewers which contributed in the past to let everyone know about my proposed change.