Mailpile: Let’s take email back

Post by alecco » Sat, Aug 03, 2013, 5:27 PM UTC

HerraBRE wrote: post #74

rhizome31 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why AGPL rather than a more liberal license like BSD or MIT? Edit: Just to clarify why I'm asking this, the project looks very interesting and I suppose the choice of AGPL wasn't made lightly, as it might slow down adoption by commercial organizations, so I'm interested in the reasoning behind this choice.

This is something we have debated extensively. Our main goal is to improve privacy and security on-line - giving cloud providers yet another free tool with which to build proprietary services and lock in more users and their data feels like it would be counterproductive. However, we are open to discussing, and if a significant fraction of our backers would prefer a more liberal license we will probably switch.

Post by Zigurd » Sat, Aug 03, 2013, 5:29 PM UTC

marquis wrote: post #14

I applaud these goals however if we were to ever consider moving from Google Apps (which we would) it would only be for an open source project given that privacy is becoming the more critical issue as the years go on. It would be great to see a subscription based email service such as this where the source is fully available for scrutinizing and patching. Edit: Great, so the source is already available.

Post by weaksauce » Sat, Aug 03, 2013, 5:42 PM UTC

yapcguy wrote: post #85

nhangen wrote: post #66

I'm in the crowdfunding business, so I feel strange saying this, but I'm really turned off by this model of 'pay us in advance for developing a product that hasn't been market tested or validated,' especially when asking for a sum as large as is $100,000. What happened to building something and selling it? According to the campaign page, the need is so great because: "We're asking for a lot of money, so of course you…

There is a thorny issue with kickstarting open-source projects like this. Suppose a third-party developer can make a major contribution to the project, to solve a nasty bug or add a technically challenging feature. How does that developer get paid? How is their contribution valued?

Post by nhaehnle » Sat, Aug 03, 2013, 5:52 PM UTC

alecco wrote: post #101

rhizome31 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why AGPL rather than a more liberal license like BSD or MIT? Edit: Just to clarify why I'm asking this, the project looks very interesting and I suppose the choice of AGPL wasn't made lightly, as it might slow down adoption by commercial organizations, so I'm interested in the reasoning behind this choice.

In an ideal world BSD/MIT would be the best choice. But in the current startup world several aynrandian douchebags would take it and make web services or paid apps. Put a lot of money on viral marketing. Pester them with feature requests. And never, ever contribute back to the community or acknowledge it helped their business. I know a famous BSD developer who switched to *GPL because of this. Also, search for tptace…

Post by nhangen » Sat, Aug 03, 2013, 5:57 PM UTC

alecco wrote: post #101

rhizome31 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why AGPL rather than a more liberal license like BSD or MIT? Edit: Just to clarify why I'm asking this, the project looks very interesting and I suppose the choice of AGPL wasn't made lightly, as it might slow down adoption by commercial organizations, so I'm interested in the reasoning behind this choice.

In an ideal world BSD/MIT would be the best choice. But in the current startup world several aynrandian douchebags would take it and make web services or paid apps. Put a lot of money on viral marketing. Pester them with feature requests. And never, ever contribute back to the community or acknowledge it helped their business. I know a famous BSD developer who switched to *GPL because of this. Also, search for tptace…