5 ms·

I’ll check in with Christian and see what he wants to do. Got any particular recommendations?

by andremedeiros 3y ago

orta 3y ago
You probably want MIT
- andremedeiros 3y ago
  Got it, thanks!
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    The advice in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36256665 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36256665 is more thorough, I wouldn’t just skip to this one.
  - brettwilcox 3y ago
    You may want to also check out Apache. Here is a good comparison of licenses. https://gist.github.com/nicolasdao/a7adda51f2f185e8d2700e1573d8a633#3-main-types-of-open-source-licenses https://gist.github.com/nicolasdao/a7adda51f2f185e8d2700e157...
    - cassianoleal 3y ago
      This gist doesn't even mention AGPL which as other users mentioned is much more appropriate for server-side apps than GPL.
alexb_ 3y ago
GPL will ensure that the source is not used by any projects not affiliated with you who are trying to profit off of your work.
- ayende 3y ago
  AGPL will do that, no GPL GPL on server side software doesn't really matter, that is why the AGPL exists
  - tyingq 3y ago
    >GPL on server side software doesn't really matter That's maybe too general. There are cases where it does matter. Maybe "GPL on software-as-a-service code has limited usefulness" Even then, people do sometimes choose it on purpose for SaaS, where they want to ensure any redistributed code, where the entity doing it makes that choice...is bound by the GPL.
gtsteve 3y ago
Some options spring to mind: 1. All rights reserved - the source is visible but not open. 2. AGPL, to ensure that if someone does take this forward, no part of it can be closed source without your agreement. 3. MIT, which is extremely permissive and effectively you don't care what someone does with it, commercial or not. Depending on your comfort level I would start with the middle option, I don't think people tend to mind you re-licensing more liberally but if a community has formed and you decide to go commercial further down the road it can cause problems.
- doublerabbit 3y ago
  All rights reserved feels more the right kick to me Gives those who wish to learn and stops from anything taking the future glory.
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    Apollo was one of the apps that was basically giving up due the API changes, right? If they aren’t doing anything with the code, might as well let people fork it. Just not MIT or BSD, I like these sorts of licenses normally, but it would be a bummer if Reddit got to steal their code after all this bad behavior.
  - jarym 3y ago
    Agree, would be awful if Reddit themselves just decide to lift and reuse this!
    - DANmode 3y ago
      Just add them as a specific exception to whatever license you use, if that's your wish.
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      Why would Reddit add another backend layer?
      - 3y ago
kahnclusions 3y ago
Take these recommendations with a grain of salt and make sure you understand the implications of each license. I wouldn’t add a license unless you specifically want to allow people to copy and use this code, otherwise just ensure that the appropriate copyright notice is present. No license is better than a badly written or badly chosen license — no license already means that all rights are reserved and no rights are given.

I’ll check in with Christian and see what he wants to do. Got any particular recommendations?

orta 3y ago

You probably want MIT

andremedeiros 3y ago
Got it, thanks!
- bee_rider 3y ago
  The advice in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36256665 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36256665 is more thorough, I wouldn’t just skip to this one.
- brettwilcox 3y ago
  You may want to also check out Apache. Here is a good comparison of licenses. https://gist.github.com/nicolasdao/a7adda51f2f185e8d2700e1573d8a633#3-main-types-of-open-source-licenses https://gist.github.com/nicolasdao/a7adda51f2f185e8d2700e157...
  - cassianoleal 3y ago
    This gist doesn't even mention AGPL which as other users mentioned is much more appropriate for server-side apps than GPL.

alexb_ 3y ago

GPL will ensure that the source is not used by any projects not affiliated with you who are trying to profit off of your work.

ayende 3y ago
AGPL will do that, no GPL GPL on server side software doesn't really matter, that is why the AGPL exists
- tyingq 3y ago
  >GPL on server side software doesn't really matter That's maybe too general. There are cases where it does matter. Maybe "GPL on software-as-a-service code has limited usefulness" Even then, people do sometimes choose it on purpose for SaaS, where they want to ensure any redistributed code, where the entity doing it makes that choice...is bound by the GPL.

gtsteve 3y ago

Some options spring to mind: 1. All rights reserved - the source is visible but not open. 2. AGPL, to ensure that if someone does take this forward, no part of it can be closed source without your agreement. 3. MIT, which is extremely permissive and effectively you don't care what someone does with it, commercial or not. Depending on your comfort level I would start with the middle option, I don't think people tend to mind you re-licensing more liberally but if a community has formed and you decide to go commercial further down the road it can cause problems.

doublerabbit 3y ago
All rights reserved feels more the right kick to me Gives those who wish to learn and stops from anything taking the future glory.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  Apollo was one of the apps that was basically giving up due the API changes, right? If they aren’t doing anything with the code, might as well let people fork it. Just not MIT or BSD, I like these sorts of licenses normally, but it would be a bummer if Reddit got to steal their code after all this bad behavior.
- jarym 3y ago
  Agree, would be awful if Reddit themselves just decide to lift and reuse this!
  - DANmode 3y ago
    Just add them as a specific exception to whatever license you use, if that's your wish.
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    Why would Reddit add another backend layer?
    - 3y ago

kahnclusions 3y ago

Take these recommendations with a grain of salt and make sure you understand the implications of each license. I wouldn’t add a license unless you specifically want to allow people to copy and use this code, otherwise just ensure that the appropriate copyright notice is present. No license is better than a badly written or badly chosen license — no license already means that all rights are reserved and no rights are given.