

Thank you! Appreciate that. Would love to hear your thoughts when you get to spin it up!


Thank you! Appreciate that. Would love to hear your thoughts when you get to spin it up!


Sure, my original thought was that GPLv3 would ensure that contributions/forks would at least remain open. Which seems novel, but 1) Realistically I probably wouldn’t have any way to enforce it, and 2) GPL is terrible for businesses, and might block genuine contributors. E.g. a company who wants to write an internal plugin/extension, would be forced to open-source it under GPL, which might not be feasible. So they either don’t use/contribute at all, or might build it themselves from scratch. Especially with AI these days, code is cheap and its easy to “reproduce” entire codebases in a fraction of the time. MIT just simplifies, and makes it fully permissive for genuine users/contributors. Do whatever you want with it (incl. forking out the license check if you want)


Hi, nice to see you here! Would love to hear your thoughts. And thanks for standing up in the comments. Much appreciated :)


Correct. But all code is there, so you can fork them out yourself if you want.


Thanks for the reply! And good question. Yes, all code, including all paid features are open source too. Not just open core. There’s nothing proprietary. Some of the paid features are gated behind a license check, but it’s all part of the same repo and MIT licensed. It’s all there to inspect or fork if you want. The perpetual license however helps support development and gives the convenience of a ready-made build.
We actually moved recently from GPLv3 to MIT to be fully permissive.
Fair, thank you!