search

devhyper / open-video-editor

Open source Android video editor, built with Media3 and Jetpack Compose.
GNU General Public License v3.0
284 stars 12 forks source link

consider agpl3 license? #40

Open RustoMCSpit opened 4 months ago

wakaztahir commented 4 months ago

@devhyper Please consider a MIT or Apache 2.0 license, Why ? because most android apps tend to be closed source, If I see a tiny bit of code from your project that I want to include in my project I can't

I could only use it on my machine, for personal projects, for that I've Python, NodeJs for writing quick scripts to modify, create videos. So its useless !

RustoMCSpit commented 4 months ago

@devhyper Please consider a MIT or Apache 2.0 license, Why ? because most android apps tend to be closed source, If I see a tiny bit of code from your project that I want to include in my project I can't

you can use it in your project, just make your project gpl3 as well. the entire point of gpl is to prevent closed source proliferation, so making it mit or apache would mean more closed source code.

I could only use it on my machine, for personal projects, for that I've Python, NodeJs for writing quick scripts to modify, create videos. So its useless !

thats false, you could make your stuff gpl3.

wakaztahir commented 4 months ago

For some projects GPL is a great idea, But when it comes to android apps its not

1 - People make clones of your projects, Add Admob ads and then publish on google play 2 - Google doesn't care if there are clones of your apps, and your app's source code is licensed under GPL 3 - I don't have the time to worry about clones of my apps

I really love open source, I contribute to it, When I have libraries I make them open source, When I work on something that makes the developer experience better, I open source it. I previously worked on a Kotlin based template engine named Kate & licensed it under GPL but I didn't like the restrictions GPL imposed so my new programming language that I'm writing is Apache 2.0 / MIT.

When you deploy a GPL based library (for self hosting), or use it in your projects that don't get to user (you build an API that utilizes a GPL based software), You don't need to make your app GPL open source. BUT The android app goes to the user.

But When you already have a great android app, that you've worked on for some time, to earn a tiny amount of money from google ads, You cannot make it closed source, Just for a small library that has GPL license !

When I make a good software, I make it open source under Apache 2.0, If people make software open source for the good of community, They should make it open source under Apache 2.0 because all these small businesses rely on open source as well. Small businesses, small teams are all people as well. Independent developers who want to earn money from their software because people just don't have jobs.

The Best fix I see for this is Make your application GPL but your library Apache 2.0 or MIT. This is the same method used by a mail company I came across https://github.com/stalwartlabs Their complete mail server is GPL. Their libraries used inside that mail server are available as MIT.

So a library that can be used to perform important operations like (muxing, triming, effects, exporting) could be made open source as MIT or Apache 2.0

RustoMCSpit commented 4 months ago

For some projects GPL is a great idea, But when it comes to android apps its not

1 - People make clones of your projects, Add Admob ads and then publish on google play 2 - Google doesn't care if there are clones of your apps, and your app's source code is licensed under GPL 3 - I don't have the time to worry about clones of my apps

not an open source issue, thats a google issue and people not knowing about it. also, ironically, those ads would have to be foss. also this can be applied to vitruallt any device

I really love open source, I contribute to it, When I have libraries I make them open source, When I work on something that makes the developer experience better, I open source it. I previously worked on a Kotlin based template engine named Kate & licensed it under GPL but I didn't like the restrictions GPL imposed so my new programming language that I'm writing is Apache 2.0 / MIT.

what restrictions? uploading the code?

When you deploy a GPL based library (for self hosting), or use it in your projects that don't get to user (you build an API that utilizes a GPL based software), You don't need to make your app GPL open source. BUT The android app goes to the user.

i doubt anyone would bother you using self hosted gpl software

But When you already have a great android app, that you've worked on for some time, to earn a tiny amount of money from google ads, You cannot make it closed source, Just for a small library that has GPL license !

too bad, thats the whole point of gpl.

When I make a good software, I make it open source under Apache 2.0, If people make software open source for the good of community, They should make it open source under Apache 2.0 because all these small businesses rely on open source as well. Small businesses, small teams are all people as well. Independent developers who want to earn money from their software because people just don't have jobs.

if this was your concern, MPL is better. i disagree with the logic.

The Best fix I see for this is Make your application GPL but your library Apache 2.0 or MIT. This is the same method used by a mail company I came across https://github.com/stalwartlabs Their complete mail server is GPL. Their libraries used inside that mail server are available as MIT.

So a library that can be used to perform important operations like (muxing, triming, effects, exporting) could be made open source as MIT or Apache 2.0

disagreed. the entire point of gpl is to force copyleft, it isnt about helping people monetise their work.

wakaztahir commented 4 months ago

not an open source issue, thats a google issue and people not knowing about it. also, ironically, those ads would have to be foss. also this can be applied to vitruallt any device

I'm an android developer, I've seen many GPL based android apps that are open source, get stolen. reskinned & put on google play. Now I don't want to make my app open source so it doesn't get stolen and I think that's not bad. It doesn't matter if its a google issue, Since it affects me, It doesn't matter.

what restrictions? uploading the code?

I came across some libraries that I wanted to use in my closed source apps but can't because GPL is copyleft & open sourcing our android app that's specific to small niche is not an option. I related to that experience so I made my next libraries MIT licensed. So someone like me could use them in his closed source apps, where GPL is not an option.

I doubt anyone would bother you using self hosted gpl software

I already know that, I never said that, It seems you didn't read it carefully. You can self host any license (nobody cares).

I didn't know what MPL is. I see you are a fanboy of open source and GPL and I know where you are coming from. You probably think I want to just use open source and keep my work closed source so I can make money by using others work. While I don't have anything against GPL, I thought this project would be better suited to an MIT license. But I've already found a decent alternative project, So I guess you can make this app GPL or AGPL.

RustoMCSpit commented 4 months ago

what alternative?

wakaztahir commented 4 months ago

I was looking for this project because I wanted to create video from images so there's bitmap2video, there's also this post https://www.sisik.eu/blog/android/media/images-to-video

This project can't help me at this moment of course, But I was thinking this project is starting out, eventually these features could be introduced.