Hash: SHA1

SaaS Could Gum Up Open Source's Code-Sharing Model

,----[ Quote ]
| The best response to someone creating a closed Web service from something
| open is to create something similar, if not better, and open it up. But if
| you're just now creating something new that lends itself to being reworked as
| a service, the Honest Public License or the AGPLv3 might make sense, at least
| until the more mainstream GPL deals with the SaaS loophole. There's nothing
| wrong with adopting, pre-emptively, a protective measure against something
| like SaaS that may indeed be "unstoppable."



Google pays for Affero ban

,----[ Quote ]
| The projects will join around 10 other AGPL-licensed efforts on SourceForge,
| compared to six on Google Code. Before the defections, Google had been
| discouraging other AGPL projects, saying Google Code does not support AGPL.
| The dispute between Google and developers who want to use AGPL - a version of
| GPLv3 tailored for use in software as a service - has rumbled on since last
| November, when AGPL was finalized.


Google blocking AGPL in Google Code

,----[ Quote ]
| So, first AGPL was not good enough for Google because it was not
| OSI-approved. That limited its popularity... Now it is OSI-approved. Still,
| it is not popular enough to be accepted in the Google closed open source
| hosting site?
| And, by the way, why should people put their open source code in the hands of
| someone who likes open source only when it does good to its business (ehm,
| that could include me, but we are not talking about me, are we ;-) ?
| C'mon Chris, give developers the ability of using AGPL for their own projects
| in Google Code. Your fight for no proliferation of licenses is something I
| subscribe to, but AGPL is the license of the future, no matter if Google
| likes it or not. And I can guarantee you it will become even more popular if
| it is accepted in Google Code...

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)