On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Ian Jackson <[email protected]> wrote: > Eitan Adler writes ("Re: Copyright arrangements for a web project"): >> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Ian Jackson >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > * Personally I'm an AGPLv3 proponent. The system ought to be suitable >> > for AGPLv3 provided that its submodules are AGPLv3-compatible (and >> > if they aren't, then we can probably write a licence exception). >> > (The main program I'm thinking of here is a Ruby on Rails >> > application.) What are people's feelings about AGPLv3 ? >> >> It is the least-free license currently approved by the OSI. > > Just out of interest, would you describe the GPLv3 as "less free" than > the MIT licence ?
Yes: there are more restrictions using GPLv3 software than when using MIT software. I fear we may be getting into a license flamewar so I shall only discuss further off-list. -- Eitan Adler _______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
