Hacker News Reader

Comment by anonymoushn | Hacker News Reader

You can't even open source your code using a license that doesn't restrict the rights of others. You would have to pay for a commercial license to be able to release your code under WTFPL, zlib, or MIT license.

View on HN

Uh, I think this is wrong. Your code is not a derivative work of Opa, you can release it under whatever permissive license you want. (Of course, if users run it using Opa, they might have obligations with respect to Opa's license, but this is a different matter.)

The Opa web site says that I cannot: "Firstly, `‘if I'm using AGPL Opa to develop an app does it need to be AGPL, too?’'. Long story short — yes, it does." It would probably be better for me to consult the license, but I don't plan on reading the license just to make sure that I really can't use a language whose developers don't want me to be able to use it

I confirm (I'm the one who wrote that FAQ entry).

However, if you wish to make your code open-source with a different license, don't hesitate to contact Mathieu.Baudet@mlstate.com, he'll certainly be happy to arrange something.

I agree that under the right circumstances, the code would have to be released under the AGPL. I disagree with the fact that you could not also release the code (your code, not including any of MLstate's code) under a permissive license like MIT or WTFPL. If you think you are in a position to forbid this, I would be interested to know your reasoning.

I actually have no clue. Perhaps hbbio can respond to this question. He's our CEO, btw.

Otherwise, you can try and ping our COO at Mathieu.Baudet@mlstate.com .

Reply on news.ycombinator.com