On 2020/05/01 12:12:40, dak wrote: > That being said, the situation regarding Scorio, a proprietary entity using Free > Software as a component of delivering a web-based service with non-disclosed > components, is _exactly_ the reason Artifex chose the AGPL as a basis for their > business model selling commercial Ghostscript licenses.
And since there is no (as far as I know) contractual, or even simply practical, obligation tying us to Scorio, this is _also_ exactly why LilyPond itself ought to follow the same way IMO. Relicensing LilyPond as AGPL for the future 2.22 branch (or even 3.0 if that, combined with all current optimization work, may be as good a reason as any for a major version bump) should be on a the table, even independently of the GhostScript situation. (That goes for many free-software programs actually, which date back from before the SaaS trend and should now consider switching to AGPL; there even were some talks of merging AGPL into GPLv4 in the future, though the past few months have put many things on hold.) Sure, that’d mean getting consent from as many contributors as we can track down, but history has proved us it’s quite achievable -- remember the move to GPLv3? It was basically hand-waved with a "are there any objections? Counting once, counting twice, sold." Just my two cents; carry on. V. https://codereview.appspot.com/548030043/
