That's an interesting question---it may be worth asking the FSF for a legal opinion. It comes down to what constitutes a program. Twenty years ago it had to do with linking I believe. If you linked to GPL'd code, your code got infected (but in a good way ;-)) but you were ok if you merely, say, called the code within a script. Nowadays where everything is run on a web page or dynamically interpreted or whatever I don't know what the criterion is.
If other people have contributed GPL3'd code, you may be able to AGPL it anyway. AGPLv3 and GPLv3 contain special clauses allowing them to coexist in the same program. Because you are the dominant author, the result would be effectively AGPL'd I think. The downside would be that you can't use GPLv2 libraries/code unless they included that "or later" clause. I'm a free software author as well and am confused by these issues. If anyone helps me with my new project I'm going to ask them to give me a BSD or LGPL license to leave my options open in the future, in case I want to go LGPL, AGPL, or whatever. -- Ben ----------------- Original message ----------------- From: Peter Bienstman <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 13:24:05 +0200 ... What I don't know is e.g. if you would rut Mnemosyne together as a component of a bigger site like Chinesepod, e.g.. Would the Affero licence then require all of the Chinesepod code to become publicly available? I don't want to go that far. Any legal advice here? Peter --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mnemosyne-proj-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mnemosyne-proj-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
