Prosperity for core, Apache for SDK / libraries, or?

Hey all. I run a company building out a hosting and app platform.

1) Core hosting platform and micro-services

Our main backend server and the CLI are currently AGPL licensed. Basically this was a placeholder decision.

We have some other unreleased core services that you need to run a full system (basically microservices) like an auth component, and a full featured file browser.

My intent is to move these all to Prosperity. We want people to be able to fully run their own version a la Gitlab, and we’ll have a default hosted version.

“Enterprise” isn’t mostly Kyle’s intent here, but I guess if an enterprise wants to run this it can and not buy a license unless they charge for it? I.e. does a commercial company using it count as commercial or not?

2) SDK Licenses

Then there is an SDK in TypeScript that people will integrate into apps they build, plus various client code libraries in other languages — eg PHP, Ruby. These are Apache licensed.

For simplicity — I could also make these Prosperity.

I know I’m getting into the weeds here, but basically I’d like to fly the Prosperity flag AND I’m not overly worried about outside contributors or competition.

I think Apache for the SDK might be less of an adoption speed bump, but as I wrote this out, realized it could just be Prosperity as well.

Any feedback welcome.

1 Like

I’m a tad lost. Probably because I’m tired.

What is the use case that you want to charge for? And the kind of buyer?

(I went back and numbered the two items to perhaps help)

I want everyone who is making money by charging people for running our services (1) to buy a license from us. So the buyer is other commercial hosting providers.

Secondarily, there is an on-prem / enterprise use case for (1) that we could potentially charge for. That might be through licensing, or it might be through support, or it might be both.

There are ideally many developers using / integrating our SDKs (2), that are either connecting to our hosting service, or to a self-hosted instance. This is a little tougher, as a lot of our stuff is meant to just work and be highly portable – we just package a bunch of conveniences up and automate them.

I think the intent to me is very clear. If there are other individuals or entities making money off our stack, they need to buy a license. Otherwise, it should be free to adopt and use for everyone.

Does that help?

Will your company also sell hosting?

Are there any commercial use cases that you don’t want to charge for a license?

Yes we sell hosting.

l think we would want all commercial usage to buy a license. Can’t really think of a scenario where that wouldn’t be the case.

Yep. You’re reaching for the right kind of tool with Prosperity.

99+% of the time, I’d say yes. Technically, depends on the use case. If a for-profit company uses on a charitable project, possibly no. But I think that practically speaking any commercial organization using the software is going to have an uphill battle to claim their use isn’t for a commercial purpose. They exist for a commercial purpose.

1 Like