Timeline for Does AGPL-3.0 require open-sourcing the derivatives if the original work is open-source?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 4 at 10:47 | comment | added | MadHatter♦ | I never said the thing you quote me as saying, so I'm not sure that's the most-sincere-looking de-escalation in the history of internet interactions. | |
| Nov 4 at 10:39 | comment | added | Dmitry Alexandrov | @MadHatter and to de-escalate a bit, I actually want to thank you. Itʼs been almost 10 years since I decided to stop wasting my time here, on stackexchange.com. And the reasons behind that, evidently, faded from my mind, so I have not resisted the temptation. You reminded me in the most frank way: “[answering the question instead of lecturing the OP on correct language is not fine]”. I must be more resistant next time. | |
| Nov 4 at 10:36 | comment | added | Dmitry Alexandrov | @MadHatter wrote: “OSI definition of "open source" contains nothing that would mandate distribution ... so I don't see that the "desert island" test is relevant here”. Sometimes, it might worth to dig a bit further than definition. OSI stance on requirements that fail ‘desert island test’, is that they are okay for their ‘open source’. Its relevance to the topic is indeed indirect, but I hope can be traced step by step by reading the question and my answer. :) | |
| Nov 4 at 10:01 | comment | added | MadHatter♦ | Thanks for the clarification on the OP's handle, I'd forgotten it. Other than that, I have no question, I'm pointing out local policy for the interpretation of the terms "free software" and "open-source" in answers. Specifically, just because the OP misunderstands one of those terms in his/her question, that doesn't mean you should perpetuate that misunderstanding in your answer. | |
| Nov 4 at 9:39 | comment | added | Dmitry Alexandrov | @MadHatter, yes, Crimson — thatʼs the OPʼs nick, as I see it. What is the question? | |
| Nov 4 at 9:09 | comment | added | MadHatter♦ | Crimson? Leaving that aside, "we" is the site rules, arrived at by community consensus. Asking a question that ignores those definitions is fine - because a legitimate answer is "your question is invalid because we don't define the term that way" - but answering it while ignoring them is not. | |
| Nov 4 at 9:00 | comment | added | Dmitry Alexandrov | @MadHatter wrote: “on this site we use ... OSI's definition of open-source... That means your very first word is wrong”. Who are those ‘we’? Crimson the OP clearly used it another sense, which means that the straight ‘No, it does not; yes, Ultralitics claims are bullshit; and you are right’ is the only correct answer to his question. | |
| Nov 4 at 8:52 | comment | added | MadHatter♦ | Note that the OSI definition of "open source" contains nothing that would mandate distribution, any more than the Four Freedoms do, so I don't see that the "desert island" test is relevant here. If anything, the problem is that the OP misunderstands the term "open-sourcing". But you don't have to perpetuate their misunderstanding in your answer - an answer which, if read without that misunderstanding, is simply wrong. | |
| Nov 4 at 8:47 | comment | added | Dmitry Alexandrov | @MadHatter wrote: “for nearly all practical purposes they may be considered the same”. Yes, except the cases, when they may not, such as this one: that concerns the ‘desert island test’. | |
| Nov 4 at 8:19 | comment | added | MadHatter♦ | I'm not saying I disagree with you, but this question's not about the age-old free/open-source debate, so your answer isn't the right place to relitigate that. I also note that on this site we use the FSF's definition of free and the OSI's definition of open-source, so for nearly all practical purposes they may be considered the same. That means your very first word is wrong, as AGPLv3 absolutely does require that derivative works be published under AGPLv3 (see AGPLv3 s5c). | |
| Nov 4 at 5:40 | history | edited | Dmitry Alexandrov | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
add links
|
| S Nov 4 at 4:14 | review | First answers | |||
| Nov 4 at 8:38 | |||||
| S Nov 4 at 4:14 | history | answered | Dmitry Alexandrov | CC BY-SA 4.0 |