On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 4:16 AM, Josselin Mouette
<joss@debian.org> wrote:
The "problem" with the AGPLv3 is that you can argue the distribution
requirement is onerous. It may be a bit more onerous for a dissident
Since anyone can get a free, anonymous account at any number of free VCS solutions, and since a dissident only need share source with those they're already permitting remote access over a network to, I do not see any situation where this would cause a problem.
but frankly we are talking about ridiculous costs here
Really? Let's look at some options;
BerliOS - free.
Gna! - free.
Launchpad - free.
Savannah - free.
Sourceforge - free (with advertising)
All of these services are extremely stable, I believe all have been in operation for more than 3 years, and these are only the most popular. This is 2008, not 1998, nobody needs to pay to host free software anymore.
As often stated on this list, you cannot always state the DFSG-freeness
of a license, you need to apply the rules to a *work*. If the sources
are several gigabytes large, then the price of distributing them becomes
unacceptable and the work may not be DFSG-free.
I'll point out, again, the phrase "standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software" in section 13; it is neither standard nor customary for a modified version of code which is several gigs in size to be distributed in full. We upload a patch or create a VCS branch for our modifications and the license is fufilled.