Any custom product I build with this will inevitably involve writing stored procedures and such in Postgres. Such changes are part of the application. I am no lawyer but I would not want to write a proprietary application for distribution using Aquameta.
If there is some bright line way to distinguish proprietary code from the current GPL3 code, this should at least be stated, probably as an extension to the license. Perhaps "code added to schemas outside those provided in the Aquameta is not subject to this license".
Alternatively, change the license. Postgres does just fine with a permissive license.
This is a delightful, novel, even game-changing way to write software, but I think the GPL3 license will prevent its success.
erichanson
commented
2 years ago
Any custom product I build with this will inevitably involve writing stored procedures and such in Postgres. Such changes are part of the application. I am no lawyer but I would not want to write a proprietary application for distribution using Aquameta.
If there is some bright line way to distinguish proprietary code from the current GPL3 code, this should at least be stated, probably as an extension to the license. Perhaps "code added to schemas outside those provided in the Aquameta is not subject to this license".
Alternatively, change the license. Postgres does just fine with a permissive license.
This is a delightful, novel, even game-changing way to write software, but I think the GPL3 license will prevent its success.