On Dec 16, 9:45 pm, "Branko Vukelic" <branko.vuke...@gmx.com> wrote: > > I guess it seems odd to say if you build an app using the entire > > web2py framework, then you can close source your app, but if you build > > Entire _unmodified_ web2py framework.
Well, it's not clear that your app can be closed sourced only when using the unmodified framework. The exception simply states, "You can distribute web2py app under any license you like as long they do not contain web2py code." The problem is, "web2py app" is not well- defined. I assume that even if you modify the framework, your app is still a "web2py app" and therefore not subject to the license. Though it may depend on the nature of the modification (e.g., tweaking the web2py code vs. swapping out some components, such as the DAL vs. using only some components, such as the DAL). I think this really needs to be cleared up. > > your app using only part of the web2py framework, you must share your > > app. For example, suppose someone plugs the DAL into Flask and builds > > Ideally yes. But there's one catch. The keyword is _distribute_ not _build_. > I hope it > clears things up a bit. Someone has also cleverly noted tha if you build your > app for > your client using whatever GPL tools you stumbled upon, you are only required > to share > the source code with the client because you're distributing it to your client > only. You > don't actually have to put it some place where everyone can see. That's > allowed. So, > it's not like you have to share it with the rest of the world. So, at least one advantage of BSD is it doesn't require all this "clearing up". ;) As evidenced by this discussion, even some long-time users and contributors aren't quite sure exactly what the web2py license allows (e.g., [1]). That's not a good sign. [1] http://groups.google.com/group/web2py-developers/msg/3cbb6720dadadd83
