On Feb 8, 2015 8:17 AM, "Tim Landscheidt" <tim(a)tim-landscheidt.de> wrote:
Tyler Romeo <tylerromeo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
One thing to point out is that:
> 1) Even right now, under the GPL, if extensions do qualify as
works” or w/e, they do have to be GPL licensed.
2) Source code
only has to be provided to users of the
program. So presuming this is some private wiki with a
secret extension, source code does not have to be provided
or published to the general public.
And if it is a non-private wiki?
I think the general disadvantage of AGPL is that it forces
you in a contract with your audience (who may be evil, or
just obnoxious). With the AGPL, you can't just customize or
develop extensions without thinking about how to publish it,
thus raising the bar for setting a up a wiki with MediaWiki.
Even security fixes would need to be published immediately.
Furthermore i think a not insignificant portion of current reusers make
minor modifications to mediawiki core code (no matter how much we
discourage it) and dont publish it (because they figure probably nobody
cares if you change a single condition check on line 1646 of some file).
They would be in violation of an agpl licensed mediawiki.