Comment by mdaniel
18 hours ago
> Open source: Pontoon is free to use by anyone
And yet, the top level license file contains two licenses, a goddamn if statement, and finally a default to Elastic License which is not open source
Then, because if this trickery, lawyers get to make good money because does "2. LICENSE file in the same directory as the work" combined with "4. Defaults to Elastic License 2.0 (ELv2)" mean that this zero byte file NAMED LICENSE but devoid of any content match clause 2 or 4?
https://github.com/pontoon-data/Pontoon/blob/v0.2.0/data-tra...
I hate cutesy licenses with all my heart. Just say you want to use Elastic, drop the Open Source pretense, and go back to selling software instead of trying to position yourself as "open"
No educated person is going to give you free commits in the current state so no need to be opaque in hopes of tricking them
To clarify the dual license, our connectors are under MIT and the core of Pontoon is under ELv2. We should have an FAQ to clarify that, since, as you mention, the license file isn't the most user friendly to read.
Pontoon is free to use and anyone can deploy it, we just want to have the protection in place in case we want to offer a managed version of Pontoon in the future for those who don't want the hassle of self-hosting.
We chose to go with ELv2 to be upfront from the start with what the license is, rather than the common trend we've seen with open source projects of starting with MIT/Apache 2.0 and then changing their license afterwards. We're really not trying to trick anyone here, we have both licenses listed right at the top of the readme.