-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clarify license #74
Comments
Honestly, this project would gain a lot of traction if it was not licensed under the AGPL (or GPL for that matter). The fact that any addons written must also be AGPL-compatible is really preventing many of us from contributing. If there are financial concerns here, Shuup can always setup a marketplace of addons where they would be able to take a cut of the sellers of the addons (similar to Magento?). I strongly urge the authors here to reconsider the licensing scheme. An MIT or Apache license would be ideal to foster a Shuup community. |
Thank you for your messages @atifsyedali and @spookylukey ! You both are right, AGPL is a pretty heavy license for the Open Source community. SO GOOD NEWS! Please stay in touch for these releases by the end of August 2016! Best, |
That's great news! Any chance that you could make the licensing changes sooner? |
Any news about the license change? Thank you! |
Any news? |
Xtheme: Fix md to html migration
AGPL seems a really strange choice for a Python ecommerce project. Some people would interpret GPL to mean that any website using shoop must provide all its source code under the same license, which is not going to be attractive to many ecommerce sites. For a Django app designed for non-profits, it might make more sense, but ecommerce sites are almost always going to be commercial.
When GPL meets Python, things get more complex:
https://jacobian.org/writing/gpl-questions/
http://lukeplant.me.uk/blog/posts/python-and-copyright/
The current license page leaves everything as clear as mud - https://www.shoop.io/shoop/license/ - but a clarification there still wouldn't be a substitute for a legal consensus on what the use of AGPL does to Python libraries and projects using them.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: