5 ms·

It took a few clicks to find the license so here it is: Apache v2. Not bad, I've been looking at open source social network software recently and unfortunately

It took a few clicks to find the license so here it is: Apache v2. Not bad, I've been looking at open source social network software recently and unfortunately all the widely used ones are AGPL3. I get the benefits but I could find anything reasonably of remotely similar quality that was even GPL3.

protomyth 7y ago
You also probably want to read their Talk Platform Acceptable Use Policy https://coralproject.net/acceptable-use-policy/ https://coralproject.net/acceptable-use-policy/
- brighter2morrow 7y ago
  Thanks, I assumed something like that for their instance of the platform, but the code is there to launch an independent instance of the platform, if desired.
JoshTriplett 7y ago
Do you have particular uses for open source social network software for which the AGPL would be a problem for your usage?
- brighter2morrow 7y ago
  Yes, I wanted to add automated moderation policies (including but not limited to word filters) to improve conversation on a platform I was considering building, but as I understand it all the algorithms to implement the policies would have to be published with the rest of the site under AGPL
  - KajMagnus 7y ago
    Why would the rest of the site have to be published under AGPL? I'm thinking other parts of the site aren't the same "work" as the conversation platform? Is the reason possibly AGPL Javascript? Maybe then server side code, could be AGPL, and Javascript instead e.g. MIT? However don't one typically place a blog commenting system in an iframe. Then personally I think you wouldn't have to release the website that embeds the blog comments iframes, under AGPL? And a discussion forum, one places on a sub domain, on a separate server? Also separate from your main website? Background: I'm developing AGPL discussion software that you can also embed in an iframe, for blog comments. https://www.talkyard.io/blog-comments https://www.talkyard.io/blog-comments. What are your thoughts about using sth like that, if the code that creates the iframe is MIT or Apache2, and the code that runs inside the iframe is AGPL?
  - mikekchar 7y ago
    I'm not trying to criticise your decision (I think it's up to you to choose the best path that's good for you), but moderation policies seem like the ideal thing to have under an AGPL license. It would certainly allow users to know exactly what's going on rather than speculate (sometime vociferously and accusatively). Obviously the downside is that being able to look at the source may allow them to game the system (and maybe it's not great for spam detection). However, even that might be turned into an advantage in that if gaming the system forces them into better ways of communicating then it's fine. From a commercial perspective, I think you would be better off with the AGPL as well (perhaps dual licensing). I don't think you'd be able to sell such software on a per-license basis anyway (or, at least you'd not make much money at it as the audience is pretty limited). I think you'd be much better off positioning yourself as an expert in the area and selling contract services for other (perhaps proprietary) systems. Cheaper to hire you than to implement it themselves while tip-toeing around your implementation which they can't infringe.
  - JoshTriplett 7y ago
    You're not required to publish your configuration, only your code. So, for instance, you could read your words to filter from a configuration file.

protomyth 7y ago

You also probably want to read their Talk Platform Acceptable Use Policy https://coralproject.net/acceptable-use-policy/ https://coralproject.net/acceptable-use-policy/

brighter2morrow 7y ago
Thanks, I assumed something like that for their instance of the platform, but the code is there to launch an independent instance of the platform, if desired.

JoshTriplett 7y ago

Do you have particular uses for open source social network software for which the AGPL would be a problem for your usage?

brighter2morrow 7y ago
Yes, I wanted to add automated moderation policies (including but not limited to word filters) to improve conversation on a platform I was considering building, but as I understand it all the algorithms to implement the policies would have to be published with the rest of the site under AGPL
- KajMagnus 7y ago
  Why would the rest of the site have to be published under AGPL? I'm thinking other parts of the site aren't the same "work" as the conversation platform? Is the reason possibly AGPL Javascript? Maybe then server side code, could be AGPL, and Javascript instead e.g. MIT? However don't one typically place a blog commenting system in an iframe. Then personally I think you wouldn't have to release the website that embeds the blog comments iframes, under AGPL? And a discussion forum, one places on a sub domain, on a separate server? Also separate from your main website? Background: I'm developing AGPL discussion software that you can also embed in an iframe, for blog comments. https://www.talkyard.io/blog-comments https://www.talkyard.io/blog-comments. What are your thoughts about using sth like that, if the code that creates the iframe is MIT or Apache2, and the code that runs inside the iframe is AGPL?
- mikekchar 7y ago
  I'm not trying to criticise your decision (I think it's up to you to choose the best path that's good for you), but moderation policies seem like the ideal thing to have under an AGPL license. It would certainly allow users to know exactly what's going on rather than speculate (sometime vociferously and accusatively). Obviously the downside is that being able to look at the source may allow them to game the system (and maybe it's not great for spam detection). However, even that might be turned into an advantage in that if gaming the system forces them into better ways of communicating then it's fine. From a commercial perspective, I think you would be better off with the AGPL as well (perhaps dual licensing). I don't think you'd be able to sell such software on a per-license basis anyway (or, at least you'd not make much money at it as the audience is pretty limited). I think you'd be much better off positioning yourself as an expert in the area and selling contract services for other (perhaps proprietary) systems. Cheaper to hire you than to implement it themselves while tip-toeing around your implementation which they can't infringe.
- JoshTriplett 7y ago
  You're not required to publish your configuration, only your code. So, for instance, you could read your words to filter from a configuration file.