Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

I wrote something like that a while back: https://github.com/iangudger/basicGoAPI

No rate limiting, but it has pretty much everything else. If you want to add it I would welcome a pull request :)




Your project is GPL licensed. Is that your idea of a joke?

There is a place for the GPL, but this is not it.


I have found the GPL is workable in web projects:

https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/132485/does-...

I understand why people don't like the GPL but its not a showstopper for most business applications.


You are grossly misguided and should consult a lawyer.

Linking to a random programmers stackexchange question is an unwise way to make licensing decisions.

Per GNU's own faq at https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#UnreleasedMods:

  A company is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a web site. Does the GPL say they must release their modified sources?

  The GPL permits anyone to make a modified version and use it without ever distributing it to others. What this company is doing is a special case of that. Therefore, the company does not have to release the modified sources.

  It is essential for people to have the freedom to make modifications and use them privately, without ever publishing those modifications. However, putting the program on a server machine for the public to talk to is hardly “private” use, so it would be legitimate to require release of the source code in that special case. Developers who wish to address this might want to use the GNU Affero GPL for programs designed for network server use.

In case you missed it: However, putting the program on a server machine for the public to talk to is hardly “private” use, so it would be legitimate to require release of the source code in that special case.

There are numerous other potential consequences to the GPL and the question of when propagation occurs is ambiguous.


In fact, you are actually the one who is grossly misguided. Per that exact quote,

  The GPL permits anyone to make a modified version and use it without ever distributing it to others. What this company is doing is a special case of that. Therefore, the company does not have to release the modified sources.

Specifically

  Therefore, the company does not have to release the modified sources.
The faq is explicitly stating that the GPL would not require releasing modified source, and that if you want to force the releasing of modified sources, you should use the AGPL, as it has a clause to cover network server software


As your quote says, it would be a legitimate request... but not one made by the GPL. Instead, if you wanted to require this from your users, you would have to use the Affero GPL which was written for this very purpose (ie to close the "application server loophole" in the normal GPL).


Are there any precedents for this side of the GPL being enforced?

How would you even know, or prove, in the first place that a company was running a modified version of the GPL'd source on their servers?


You probably are thinking of the AGPL, which would make that requirement. Normal GPL doesn't.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: