Daniel Quinlan wrote: > aspects of the AL 2.0 don't really translate to services, but use does > and that's my main concern with Razor2.
I find Theo's argument that use of the razor server is always free to a user of a free SA distribution compelling. Code being free but charging for service is in the best tradition of Free and of Open Source software. Redhat's up2date is open source code (GPL?), using it to access their server possibly costs money. Email client software can be free while the account on the mailhost it talks to costs money. If the razor services are free to anyone who has not paid for the client, that is even more liberal than most service-based systems. It also means that anyone to whom we distribute SpamAssassin can use the razor servers for free, which seems compatible not just with the letter but also the spirit of the Apache License. -- sidney
