Comment by fukka42
4 months ago
Did they ever get permissions from their contributors to switch to AGPL? Last I checked they did not. They didn't require a CLA either.
So no matter what they claim large parts of the codebase are still apache2.
4 months ago
Did they ever get permissions from their contributors to switch to AGPL? Last I checked they did not. They didn't require a CLA either.
So no matter what they claim large parts of the codebase are still apache2.
It wouldn't matter anyways, you cannot relicense historic releases.
It does matter, since the current AGPL license status is questionable at best, they did not have permission to relicense code added by contributors. This is why CLAs exist.
If you don't have a CLA you just end up with the new changes being AGPL which creates a mixed license amalgamation which in practical terms regresses down to the stricter of the licenses which would be the AGPL.