Change the license? #10
Comments
|
Affero GNU, so that affects, I believe, running it on/from a server too. Can you tell me more about your needs? |
|
Shawn,
GNU is viral and super business unfriendly. Affero GNU is even worse. No
one in his right mind will touch GNU-licensed library for commercial
projects.
GNU is typically used by companies to offer simultaneously commercial
license and pseudo "open source license" for something if significant
value, to protect against free use.
If that is you goal - fine! ... But as long as there are other json java
schema validators that are business friendly and open source, this library
will be dead on arrival.
I filed this issue only because it is very unusual for a project of that
kind to have GNU license.
Please disregard/close the issue if that was/is your true intention.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 13:47 Shawn Silverman ***@***.***> wrote:
Affero GNU, so that affects, I believe, running it on/from a server too.
Can you tell me more about your needs?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#10 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABIURRGS7LB6PZ7JEEFXVELSQQ6GHANCNFSM4T2PIKFQ>
.
/Hristo Stoyanov
|
|
So you’re saying GNU is only a pseudo open source licence that protects against free use? According to https://opensource.org/licenses, GNU is an open source licence. How does GNU protect against free use? This is literally an “open source” project. I’m an individual that wrote this for fun and who cares about properly-implemented specifications. One of my main goals is correctness, so that it can be used as a reference implementation. I’m hearing from your comments above that you think this project has significant value. I appreciate the compliment. :) When you say “dead on arrival,” what do you mean, and for whom? This validator works great. My metric isn’t how many people use it, but how many tests it passes from https://github.com/json-schema-org/JSON-Schema-Test-Suite. (It passes all of them (Draft 06 and above), by the way.) Did you want to talk about how it could be used commercially without a GNU licence, under a different licence? I suppose I could explore that but I haven’t thought about it much. There’s a buy-me-a-coffee link at the top of the readme if someone likes the software, but that’s really as far as I’ve considered. Can you tell me more about business and commercial use cases as related to free software? What do you do for your own open source projects? |
|
Shawn,
*>How does GNU protect against free use?*
By forcing you to open up your entire closed source/commercial software
under GNU Affero too - it is a "viral" license. If you do not want to do
that (99% of commercial/closed software vendors would refuse), this library
is out of consideration.
*>When you say “dead on arrival,” what do you mean, and for whom?*
See my point above - using your library will infect all of my codebase with
GNU Affero license, and I probably do not want to open source it, or if I
do - not under GNU Affero license! So, as soon as I see that "GNU license"
this library goes in the trash can immediately (for me)
Of course, if I want to publish my code under GNU Affero license as well,
that this library is fine - that would be a very small minority of
potential users/developers.
*>Did you want to talk about how it could be used commercially without a
GNU licence, under a different licence?*
Yes - consider either Apache or BSD or even LGPL. Otherwise I (or other
developers) could just pick one of the alternatives [here](
https://json-schema.org/implementations.html#validator-java), none of which
comes with the burdens of GNU!
I have no opinion on the technical merits - how fast or how correct the
validator is, or whether it implements the latest draft. I literally do not
want to even try it under GNU license.
I am just trying to point you to an issue that you might have overlooked
the importance of, which, in my view will preclude a lot of folks from
using what could otherwise be an excellent library.
Again, if you are aware of what GNU Affero entails and you are OK with
it, *please
close this issue*. There is nothing else to explain, and sorry for
wasting your time.
Cheers!
…On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 4:30 PM Shawn Silverman ***@***.***> wrote:
So you’re saying GNU is only a pseudo open source licence that protects
against free use? According to https://opensource.org/licenses, GNU is an
open source licence. How does GNU protect against free use? This is
literally an “open source” project.
I’m an individual that wrote this for fun and who cares about
properly-implemented specifications. One of my main goals is correctness,
so that it can be used as a reference implementation. I’m hearing from your
comments above that you think this project has significant value. I
appreciate the compliment. :)
When you say “dead on arrival,” what do you mean, and for whom? This
validator works great. My metric isn’t how many people use it, but how many
tests it passes from
https://github.com/json-schema-org/JSON-Schema-Test-Suite. (It passes all
of them (Draft 06 and above), by the way.)
Did you want to talk about how it could be used commercially without a GNU
licence, under a different licence? I suppose I could explore that but I
haven’t thought about it much.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#10 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABIURRBVCFRVSFSI2PZMNX3SQRRLXANCNFSM4T2PIKFQ>
.
--
/ Hristo Stoyanov
|
|
Now that you mention it, you’re saying commercial, closed-source software will only use my validator project if it’s completely free and unencumbered. Why on earth would I want to spend my time supporting for free something that makes money only for someone else? I don’t get that logic. I’ll support other free projects with free software but commercial projects with commercial software. Commercial users are free to negotiate a non-GNU licence with me if they choose. This is something free and open source, and excellent quality, that you say is trash. I really don’t understand your “give it to me to make money from or I won’t use it” mentality; how will that get you very far? Give me one incentive. I just don’t understand. |
|
Shawn,
I never said your library is trash (you keep twisting my words!) All I said
is that many developers (including myself) would never touch or contribute
to GNU licensed code, exactly because it inhibits commercial use.
I also create truly free, open source software and I would never inflict a
GNU license on those who want to use it, commercially or not!
I do not need your library, it is not that significant to warrant a cost
of anything above $0 (feel free to disagree). Fortunately, there are better
commercially free alternatives. Peace!
…On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 7:39 PM Shawn Silverman ***@***.***> wrote:
Now that you mention it, you’re saying commercial, closed-source software
will only use my validator project if it’s completely free *and*
unencumbered. Why on earth would I want to spend my time supporting for
free something that makes money only for someone else? I don’t get that
logic.
I’ll support other free projects with free software but commercial
projects with commercial software. Commercial users are free to negotiate a
non-GNU licence with me if they choose.
This is something free and open source, and excellent quality, that you
say is trash. I really don’t understand your “give it to me to make money
from or I won’t use it” mentality; how will that get you very far? Give me
one incentive. I just don’t understand.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#10 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABIURRC5SOWTZ6AECIAILODSQSHOZANCNFSM4T2PIKFQ>
.
--
/ Hristo Stoyanov
|
|
So now my project is worth $0. Classy. |
ssilverman
added
entitled
|
This issue is becoming insulting and less constructive each comment. To future readers of this issue: this is a great example of how to step on and insult someone’s hobby. I do projects like these because I enjoy them. Please be respectful of other peoples’ work. In other words, don’t disparage it or call it worthless or trash like the poster here. You don’t have to use a project if you don’t want to. |
|
Hi @ssilverman, I agree with your valuation, at least with regards to the library; it does look good and it is good that it is based on GSON. So picking up on one thing you said there; what would a commercial license look like, cost and provide? |
|
@nicklasb thanks for the question. This might be a better discussion to have outside of the GitHub issue. Send me an email and we can arrange to discuss. |
|
@nicklasb just following up, in case I didn’t see an email from you. |
Under the GNU License, this library is almost useless. Can you please change the license to Apache 2.0?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: