|
https://blog.gitea.io/2022/10/open-source-sustainment-and-the-future-of-gitea/ “there are a few corporations (with revenues that are greater than some countries GDP) are building on Gitea for core products without even contributing back enhancements”. Well, duh … What did you expect when you released it under the MIT license? Ever heard of AGPL? 7 comments
@martin yep, when the #geekproblem takes social/politics outa their coding projects with "permissive licences" they always end up in the same mess/path. Ideas for constructive communication on this mess? "This is of course within the scope of the license, however prevents others from the community from also benefitting." They seem to understand.  @martin Also, MIT would allow easy re-licensing, so that at least future code changes would be “protected”.  @pixelcode @martin MIT does not allow re-licensing unless you’re the copyright owner (or have the permission of all copyright owners). It allows sublicensing, which would not have the protections you desire. What you can do is license all future changes and additions under AGPL, which would create not a dual license/sublicense but a hybrid license which, for all intents and purposes, would mean your codebase will enjoy the protections of AGPL. Think of it as a poison pill, if you will :) |
Gregory's Server
@martin your comment is spot on and I'm worried about Gitea becoming open-core and/or corporate-driven and impacting #codeberg @Codeberg