Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Stay strong, don't give in to pressure by people who are sore because their open source free lunch is ending.

I don't disagree with this sentiment, but the dual licensing is somewhat of a two-edged sword. If they're perfectly fine building the entire Meteor stack in house, then a dual licensed commercial/GPL is fine, but if they're trying to encourage me to join a community of contributors to help build the platform then I'm definitely demotivated by the dual-license. Why should I contribute code to them (and presumably sign a CLA since that's the only way they can dual-license my code) if I'm going to have to pay them if I ever want to build a closed source app myself?



Yep. That's why I recommended them to consider AGPL.

EDIT: you should keep the GPL licence only for patches sent upstream




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: