A) they don't name the license they're using and I don't recognise it. They claim it's open source but the wordage I saw references lots of "personal use" "no reverse engineering" "no redistributing without explicit permission".
B) their faq and comparison pages are inconsistent - faq says ldap/oauth is in both editions, comparison page says those features are enterprise only.
you can find its full text here along with the source code: https://code.rhodecode.com/rhodecode-enterprise-ce/files/946...
Being AGPL means my interest in this is now extinguished anyway, but the information on the site doesn't inspire confidence either.
> you must also publicly release any code that connects to an AGPL piece of software over a network. I fear the day that an HTTP server is built using AGPL. Think about it.
I don't think this is true, which part of the AGPL license implies that? It is my understanding that AGPL means that even if you don't redistribute the software with that license - you still need to put the sources online. Nothing about interaction of 3rd part software.
After all database servers are released under AGPL - like mongoDB among the popular ones.