> > Example, I can use joomla to create commercial websites for my clients, > also I can use it if I am a hosting provider to offer as a service "create > site" tool. > > But I cant use Joomla to create a : *Bruno's joomla commercial platform*to > compete with Joomla. > > I think if you are going to keep the code in your server the code is > yours, but if you want to redistribute the platform, you have to contribute > back to community. The problem is not money, the problem is using open > source code to create commercial platforms and not contributing back to the > community. > > Can I take web2py source and create "Bruno's commercial framework" ?? > extend it and sell to my clients, keeping my improvements closed? >
No, you can't do that with web2py because of the LGPL license, but you could do that with Django, Flask, Pyramid, and Rails. I guess that still doesn't answer the "why" question. If it's OK to use open source code to create a commercial website (perhaps even a SaaS model that is essentially a "platform") without contributing code back to the community, then why is it not OK to use open source code to create a commercial "platform"? Why should one warrant code contribution back to the community but not the other? Neither the AGPL folks nor the BSD/MIT folks seem to think there should be a distinction (AGPL allows neither use case, and BSD/MIT allow both). Only GPL really makes the distinction, and the FSF folks seem to think that was simply an unfortunate oversight rather than a principled position (hence the AGPL). For what it's worth, most of the Django and Rails based CMSes are BSD/MIT licensed (as are Django and Rails themselves). I'm not sure what their experience has been getting contributions, or if they have in any way been hampered by commercial forks (or if there are even any commercial forks). Anthony
