Most people will be using it as an LSP in their editors. Some companies might be interested in creating services on top of it. They won't be hosting the LSP, but they might want to use it to index code. And at that point there's at least some way for monetization.
Due to AGPL's viral nature they will have to open source their code if they use it as a library. But in general I feel like companies simply don't want to deal with the potential "threat" of lawsuits so they don't want to use it that way. This means they either search for other solutions or will try to negotiate some kind of deal.
It was originally designed to be used by government software in the EU. AFAIK, it doesn't really get used for much else, but it fills a niche not covered by the GPL family, which is weak/non-viral copyleft (as the LGPL provides), plus handling SaaS in a reasonable way (as the AGPL provides).
Copyleft protects against proprietary forking, and also assures the community you can't close the source in the future. Weak/non-viral copyleft makes it so you can still link it to proprietary software, so you could sell integrations (non-LSP) or closed-source plugins.
LGPL and GPL licensed software can be provided over a network with proprietary changes. The AGPL and EUPL both close that hole. Every change to the modules covered by the EUPL must be open sourced, even in that case.
If your intention is to monetize the LSP itself, open source is probably not what you want. It's fundamental to open source that anyone can use it for any purpose, and also fork it. Permissive licenses like the MIT license allow relicensing to a proprietary license later (see Redis) but that causes problems with the community (see Redis), and is nearly guaranteed to cause a fork.
Currently none, but I'm currently re-implementing the Jedi part (auto-completions/goto), which needs lots of type inference on unannotated code. There will therefore be soon be a non-compatible mode that infers unannotated code as good as possible. I hope it is going to be ready a month from now.
I think you underestimate how hard it is to move from Mypy to Pyright in big codebases. Having something very very close to Mypy should be very interesting for some companies with 1mLoC+. Relative maturity can still be a reason for 1-2 years and I have no idea what to do at that point.
Relative maturity can be a reason for quite a while (people overestimate how far Pyrefly and Ty are).
I'm still thinking about a good model for the future, because I know that in the future they will be fine type checkers. I think the biggest advantage I have is that I don't burn big sums of money while doing it, so I only need a modest income. I think my current proposal would be a very fair way to make money. But I also see that this might not work if the competition offers everything for free and open source.
The ORM models do not work with typing at all, you basically have to make a lot of magic work if you want to support it in a type checker (especially if you want to work with reverse foreign keys). Generally type checkers do not just support the Django ORM. For Mypy there's a plugin that works pretty well, but uses runtime information, which further slows down Mypy.
Django compatibility could definitely be a selling point, but I haven’t built a dedicated Django plugin yet. Right now, I’m prioritizing features like auto-completion and go-to-definition, which I think are more impactful in the short term.
The thing is, both Ty and PyreFly aren’t really close to the level of Mypy or Pyright — neither in terms of features nor stability. ZubanLS already covers the important features, though there are still some bugs I’m working through. So in that sense, yes: At the moment the selling point is that it just works.
If I'm perfectly honest, I don't know yet. I'm currently pretty open to any model that ensures long-term survival of the project. Some people might be interested because it can be used as a replacement for Mypy and I'm willing to solve the issues they have in their 1mLoC+ codebases. It is absolutely non-trivial at this point to replace Mypy with Pyright or vice-versa in a larger codebase.
I'm definitely not qualified to offer an informed opinion on a specific license, but there are a variety to choose from under the general heading of Source-available Licenses. There are definitely tradeoffs so it may not make sense for you, but it might open up some portion of the market that might not consider a black box.
The MagicMock case is indeed interesting. I am not sure what Mypy does there, I would have to investigate. The other issues are probably bugs and should be reported to https://github.com/zubanls/zubanls/issues if you are interested in fixes.
This is such a defeatist and simplistic answer. Climate warming models show big differences between 2 and 4 degrees Celcius. I know the planet is eventually going to be extinguished, but we are nowhere near that point and just giving up seems like a very bad idea for our children...
Acceptance is the road to inner peace. Accepting the mortality of the species is no different to accepting personal mortality - you know you're going to be dead before the end of the century, right? You enjoy the time you have, as we all collectively should. To expect even one person, ever mind a whole country to give up living like Royalty is unreasonable. (despite its inevitability). Big fast cars, abundance of food, instant satiation, nobody's going to give that up voluntarily.
Asking for taxes to go up is fine, but nobody wants to pay more taxes.
I agree that this is where it is likely going to go. I have also found my peace about that a while ago. On a personal level I also don't believe that giving up big cars, flying and other things is something that nobody is doing. There are quite a few people that avoid such things, including me.
I feel like you underestimate the energy that sacrifice releases. I also feel like you don't have children. Because if you did a sentence like "you know you're going to be dead before the end of the century, right?" would probably not be what you were thinking. Exactly when you have something to lose (the life of your children and grand children), it generates a desire to change this miserable state that the world is in. This is not a depressed or negative state. It's the opposite. It feel like diving into the issues of the world and not looking away.
And I think the injunction to "Enjoy!" is exactly what's wrong with the world and what leads you away from inner peace. This is what psycho analysts have discovered quite a while ago and what religious people are able to avoid by having higher goals than your own enjoyment. My own experience with this is that since I have given up trying to enjoy my life and I'm trying to wrestle with my own negativity, life is better.
