7 ms·

Yep, already thinking about alternatives to Grafana in the long term now...

• josephcsible 5y ago
  Why? If your software is already all available under permissive licenses, what does Grafana's new license require of you that you weren't already doing?
  • jrv 5y ago
    Oh nothing for now, and there's likely not going to be a viable alternative around for a while. But long-term, I don't see Grafana as part of the openly sharing ecosystem anymore, as with them being under the AGPL, but most other relevant OSS projects in the space being under permissive licenses, the whole idea of code sharing now goes out of the window (or rather, becomes one-way). I don't like the long-term implications of this for the ecosystem.
  • pvorb 5y ago
    Maybe I want to keep my software under a permissive license? AGPL would also infect my code, no? And what if we're talking about proprietary code that doesn't have much to do with Grafana and only uses it for monitoring?
    • saagarjha 5y ago
      You can keep your software under a permissive license, as long as you ship it under the GPL.
      • pvorb 5y ago
        You mean in binary form?
        • saagarjha 5y ago
          Your software will be effectively dual-licensed.
    • gpanders 5y ago
      If you're only using Grafana, but not modifying it and re-distributing it, then the AGPL places no obligation on you. You only have to license your own software as AGPL if it is a derivative work of another AGPL licensed program.
      • pvorb 5y ago
        Thanks. Misunderstanding by me. I got the term "linking" wrong.