Softethervpn: Please discuss: About switching the project license to Apache License from GPL.

Created on 25 Apr 2018 · 58Comments · Source: SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN

I'd like to hear opinions from contributors and users of the SoftEther VPN Project about the project license.

Currently the license of SoftEther VPN is GPL. I am personally considering that if we change the project license from GPL License to Apache License (or any other BSD-like licenses). Then SoftEther VPN would be more suitable for various applications (e.g. hardware manufacturers). This idea would be beneficial for all people who are (and will be) using SoftEther VPN.

However, ito realize this, we need ask to every existing code contributors to agree changing to Apache (or BSD) License from GPL.

In this present time we have approximately 30 contributors. They have contributed Pull Requests in the assumption to adopt GPL license to these codes. Today it is still easy to obtain the general consensus from all existing contributors. In the future (e.g. a few years later) it must be very difficult to switch the license.

Therefore I'd like to discuss about this topic.

Source

dnobori

👍11

Most helpful comment

Pull request merged.

davidebeatrici on 21 Jan 2019

❤3 🎉2 👍2

All 58 comments

I think that switching the project license from GPL to a BSD-like one is a very good idea, as it would push software and hardware manufacturers to add support for SoftEther VPN in their products.

Much more people would probably be preferring it to other solutions, especially for its performance, if available and ready to be used out-of-the-box on their device (usually a router).

I agree to changing the project license to Apache License or any other BSD-like licenses.

davidebeatrici on 25 Apr 2018

👍4

Although I'm just a user I would agree this proposal and with davidbeatrici that it should be changed to the least restrictive type of licence. There's always the Open Source Initiative licence, perhaps the two or three clause ones might be interesting:

https://opensource.org/licenses

fenice2 on 25 Apr 2018

👍5

I support to change to Apache License. SE project is very great, but not used everywhere that needing L2 connect, maybe part because to GPL license limit. So, I am glad to see SoftEtherVPN project change to Apache License.

connLAN on 25 Apr 2018

👍3

Yes I also support switching to Apache or so for obvious reasons. But i'm also afraid that you won't be able to get the approval of ALL contributors to this project, not even 50%. Probably most people won't see or will ignore this thread.

So my humble suggestion would be, when a good chunk of contributors agree on this move, is to announce the switch and ask anyone with objection to come forward, otherwise we switch one one month or less

moatazelmasry2 on 25 Apr 2018

👍3

Then we will have to create a new branch 'GPL' as the complete snapshot of the particular day (to switch to Apache License). After that period we will have to remove all commits which authors are unreachable or are not allowed to change to Apache License. Then the master branch will continue to contain only Apache License codes.

dnobori on 26 Apr 2018

👍1

https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/pull/519

dnobori on 26 Apr 2018

personally, I do not care about license.

however, I'm afraid that "fork and remove non gpl commits" is potentially dangerous from lawer point of view. some people will want money from you and will endlessly take you to court "there were my gpl commits... they were removed ... I insist that gpl was violated"

chipitsine on 26 Apr 2018

👎1 👍1

"there were my gpl commits... they were removed ... I insist that gpl was violated"

In such a point of view, his codes which were committed under the GPL license were not removed. They are still stored in the "gpl" branch. The "gpl" branch will continuously keeping GPL as the license.

dnobori on 26 Apr 2018

What about switching to a license compatible with the GPLv2, such as the 3-clause BSD?

davidebeatrici on 26 Apr 2018

👍1

+1 on switching to Apache license, or even a BSD license.

--
0101100101000001010010000101010101000001010010000010000001000010
0100110001000101010100110101001100100000010110010100111101010101

qbeukes on 26 Apr 2018

You guys also need to reed some forums about switching, pros and cons. so that there is no misunderstanding there. GPL -> Apache/BSD is not always easy.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1409666/switching-license-from-gpl-to-bsd-in-later-time

https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/304/can-i-take-bsd-licensed-code-and-distribute-it-under-gpl

https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/75436/relicense-bsd-2-3-clause-code-to-gpl

moatazelmasry2 on 26 Apr 2018

Also there is always the dual license option

moatazelmasry2 on 26 Apr 2018

Preliminary to further movements, I'd like to add the following sentence on the Pull Request template.

PRELIMINARY DECLARATION FOR FUTURE SWITCH TO A NON-GPL LICENSE

I hereby agree in advance that my work will be licensed automatically under the Apache License or a similar BSD/MIT-like open-source license in case the SoftEther VPN Project adopts such a license in future.

I suppose that even if this modification has profits, not harmful.

Please kindly comment on this modification on https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/pull/519 .

dnobori on 26 Apr 2018

For now, I realize that there are no risks to switch from GPL to the BSD-like license after summarizing approval from every existing contributors (= copyright holders). In case if some contributors doesn't reply anything, we can keep the master branch excluding such GPL codes.

I listed 25 contributors who committed programs to this project at 2018/04/25 19:20.
(Excluding very minor changes which will not treated as a copyright-protected work in Japanese Copyright laws.)

At a glance, more than half of the contributed codes have only minor changes. If some contributors don't agree to this switch motion to non-GPL, we can rewrite such work without using any contributed GPL codes.

In other hand, it would be more difficult in future that more contributors will commit their works to this project under the current license. For example if we will have 500+ contributors in future, It is impossible to collect approval from 500+ contributors.

dnobori on 26 Apr 2018

❤1

+1 for changing the license.

Although I think that my contribution is minor change, I would like to express my opinion just in case.

PRELIMINARY DECLARATION FOR FUTURE SWITCH TO A NON-GPL LICENSE

I hereby agree in advance that my work will be licensed automatically under the Apache License or a similar BSD/MIT-like open-source license in case the SoftEther VPN Project adopts such a license in future.

parly on 29 Apr 2018

Dear @dnobori , have you decided to switch to Apache license, or even a BSD license? if so,when?

connLAN on 1 May 2018

To decide switching to Apache license, I need the consensus on this community.

At least, I have to send letters to each of existing contributors to ask whether agree to adopt Apache license. I suppose that we need to decide about this issue after the ratio of agreed contributors will be discovered.

Could anybody please kindly write a draft of the email to ask to each contributor in English?

dnobori on 1 May 2018

+1 switching to Apache.
GPL limits options way too much in my opinion, and what we want is SE to be everywhere

pdarcos on 10 May 2018

Also +1! :)

Here's a quick draft I sketched out, replace <x> with contributor's username/email and replace "SoftEther VPN team" with whatever you would prefer for public title. Sorry if this isn't what you were looking for :blush:

Dear <x>,

I am with the SoftEther VPN team and am reaching out to you because you have contributed to the SoftEther VPN project in the past. We need your approval in order to open up the project's license to be more permissive. This change could encourage wider adoption of the VPN all around.

Please let us know if you approve or disapprove of this change in the Github issue at https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/issues/516. There are more details on the licensing change in that Github issue if you would like more information before making your decision.

Please let us know as soon as possible as we cannot move forward without your input! Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
The SoftEther VPN Team

It looks as though you have identified some of the contributor's PRs so a cute idea that might be seen as considerate would be to paste in their respective links in the e-mail, but I don't think that is necessary, but it may encourage good-will and anything that can help to encourage them to provide feedback is probably warranted.

r4j4h on 11 May 2018

+1 As a user I would also prefer Apache or BSD-like license.

sjorge on 28 Jun 2018

Can I just make the point in defence of the GPL.

Why not just keep it on GPL. The GPL doesn't preclude you offering
Commercial licence with differing terms for say a Vendor who wants to
integrate the product. It would be easier to continue as GPL community
project and have a closed fork which you have acquired and/or removed
others contributions made under the GPL at this point in time.

In my opinion the GPL provides the best community development model and
ensures that features are primarily targeted at the Open and Available
branch.

If a vendor wants to scratch a particular itch, and for some reason doesn't
want to contribute to the GPL mainline, then they can approach you as the
copyright owner for the forked branch.

On 29 June 2018 at 08:35, Jorge Schrauwen notifications@github.com wrote:

+1 As a user I would also prefer Apache or BSD-like license.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/issues/516#issuecomment-401164941,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AARer4sjrC7P_9UZtXGLgbcRu586-pSFks5uBT4bgaJpZM4TjMHx
.

aenertia on 28 Jun 2018

👍1

I agree to changing the license.

macvk on 29 Jun 2018

Could the arguments be summarized somewhere? The argument, that the Linux kernel as a GPLv2 project is used everywhere kind of makes the argument, that the license prevents software and hardware manufactures from using it moot.

paulmenzel on 27 Jul 2018

We currently need the approval from:
~@a-kr~, ~@quantum5~, ~@maksqwe~, ~@ajeecai~, ~@NoahO~, ~@cm0x4D~, ~@LegDog~, ~@mcsalgado~, ~@micsell~, ~@holoreimu~, ~@yehorov~, ~@el1n~, ~@yfdyh000~, ~@nattoheaven~, ~@tonychung00~, ~@sacha~, ~@nvsofts~, ~@scj643~, @rel22, ~@timschneider~, ~@mogikanin~, ~@jsoref~, ~@mlaily~, ~@nna774~, ~@ziozzang~, ~@dglushenok~, ~@joshperry~, ~@hsaito~.

davidebeatrici on 12 Aug 2018

I agree to changing the license.

maksqwe on 13 Aug 2018

I agree to changing the license.

a-kr on 13 Aug 2018

No objections from me. I agree to changing the project license to Apache.

mcsalgado on 13 Aug 2018

I agree to changing the license.
(Although, I think I'd argue that my commit should fall below the standard necessary to impact copyright. I may have changed many files/lines, but each change was trivial.)

jsoref on 13 Aug 2018

I agree with this change.

hsaito on 13 Aug 2018

I agree to changing the license.

nvsofts on 13 Aug 2018

No objections, thanks

On Sun, Aug 12, 2018, 7:44 PM NV notifications@github.com wrote:

I agree to changing the license.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/issues/516#issuecomment-412377057,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJJ4AVvNV51ruzeFz_2jz18zj1B93rDuks5uQK_YgaJpZM4TjMHx
.

LegDog on 13 Aug 2018

No objections to changing the license.

quantum5 on 13 Aug 2018

No objections to changing the license.

noaho on 13 Aug 2018

I agree to changing the license.

nattoheaven on 13 Aug 2018

No objection.

On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Davide Beatrici notifications@github.com
wrote:

We currently need the approval from:
@a-kr https://github.com/a-kr, @quantum5 https://github.com/quantum5,
@parly https://github.com/parly, @maksqwe https://github.com/maksqwe,
@ajeecai https://github.com/ajeecai, @NoahO https://github.com/NoahO,
@cm0x4D https://github.com/cm0x4D, @LegDog https://github.com/LegDog,
@mcsalgado https://github.com/mcsalgado, @micsell
https://github.com/micsell, @holoreimu https://github.com/holoreimu,
@yehorov https://github.com/yehorov, @el1n https://github.com/el1n,
@yfdyh000 https://github.com/yfdyh000, @nattoheaven
https://github.com/nattoheaven, @tonychung00
https://github.com/tonychung00, @sacha https://github.com/sacha,
@nvsofts https://github.com/nvsofts, @scj643 https://github.com/scj643,
@rel22 https://github.com/rel22, @timschneider
https://github.com/timschneider, @mogikanin
https://github.com/mogikanin, @jsoref https://github.com/jsoref,
@mlaily https://github.com/mlaily, @nna774 https://github.com/nna774,
@ziozzang https://github.com/ziozzang, @dglushenok
https://github.com/dglushenok, @joshperry https://github.com/joshperry,
@hsaito https://github.com/hsaito.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/issues/516#issuecomment-412374452,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHf09OX8eGwNPsuL622HW0OI0vd0dhr1ks5uQKQ2gaJpZM4TjMHx
.

Tony Chung

tonychung00 on 13 Aug 2018

No objections!

mogikanin on 13 Aug 2018

IIRC I only fixed some typo, but if you need my approval, you have it!

mlaily on 13 Aug 2018

I agree

Regards,
Mike.

On 13 Aug 2018, at 3:45, Luiz Eduardo Gava notifications@github.com wrote:

No objections, thanks

On Sun, Aug 12, 2018, 7:44 PM NV notifications@github.com wrote:

I agree to changing the license.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/issues/516#issuecomment-412377057,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJJ4AVvNV51ruzeFz_2jz18zj1B93rDuks5uQK_YgaJpZM4TjMHx
.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

micsell on 13 Aug 2018

I agree to change the license.

cm0x4D on 13 Aug 2018

I agree to changing the license.

13 авг. 2018 г., в 0:55, Davide Beatrici notifications@github.com написал(а):

We currently need the approval from:
@a-kr https://github.com/a-kr, @quantum5 https://github.com/quantum5, @parly https://github.com/parly, @maksqwe https://github.com/maksqwe, @ajeecai https://github.com/ajeecai, @NoahO https://github.com/NoahO, @cm0x4D https://github.com/cm0x4D, @LegDog https://github.com/LegDog, @mcsalgado https://github.com/mcsalgado, @micsell https://github.com/micsell, @holoreimu https://github.com/holoreimu, @yehorov https://github.com/yehorov, @el1n https://github.com/el1n, @yfdyh000 https://github.com/yfdyh000, @nattoheaven https://github.com/nattoheaven, @tonychung00 https://github.com/tonychung00, @sacha https://github.com/sacha, @nvsofts https://github.com/nvsofts, @scj643 https://github.com/scj643, @rel22 https://github.com/rel22, @timschneider https://github.com/timschneider, @mogikanin https://github.com/mogikanin, @jsoref https://github.com/jsoref, @mlaily https://github.com/mlaily, @nna774 https://github.com/nna774, @ziozzang https://github.com/ziozzang, @dglushenok https://github.com/dglushenok, @joshperry https://github.com/joshperry, @hsaito https://github.com/hsaito.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/issues/516#issuecomment-412374452, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKDsKBIirUAevkG5ewzZqCZn9Y0TWvN6ks5uQKQ2gaJpZM4TjMHx.

—
Dmitry Glushenok

dglushenok on 13 Aug 2018

No objections to changing the license, thanks.

holoreimu on 13 Aug 2018

I agree

From: Holoreimu notifications@github.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 4:35:47 AM
To: SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN
Cc: Sacha J. Bernstein; Mention
Subject: Re: [SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN] Please discuss: About switching the project license to Apache License from GPL. (#516)

No objections to changing the license, thanks.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/issues/516#issuecomment-412446636, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGrxGmVIcyr9B9gNUKQIGfZBjE0XyF0ks5uQTpjgaJpZM4TjMHx.

sacha on 13 Aug 2018

I have no objection.

yehorov on 13 Aug 2018

I agree.

Thanks

ajeecai on 14 Aug 2018

I have no objections and agree to changing the license to Apache. Thanks

timschneider on 14 Aug 2018

Hmm, wasn't notified on this issue (though I'm still a contributor, even if it was for a small but simple change).

Anyway, no probleem for me.

DDGo on 21 Aug 2018

You contributed with pull request #276, but we removed the debian folder when we switched to CPack.

davidebeatrici on 22 Aug 2018

No objections to our contributions being used under a BSD-style license. Seems it could have benefits for the project.

joshperry on 22 Aug 2018

From my point of view:
anyone that does not strictly mention in a written request that "Please never use my code except for GPLv2" has leaved full ownership of his work to @dnobori as he is the owner of the original source-code's.

Will try to explain situation with below example:

I publish this comment under GPLv2 license (anyone is allowed to change it and republish under GPLv2 until they do not take that right away from others to do so) was very simple now this comment is under GPLv2.
- now someone does come and finds a Grammar or any other issue and leaves Me know about it.
  
  of-course I will fix that like he says or even better...
- anyway would he mention "but you are never allowed to use my work except for GPLv2"
  
  that would be offending and I would answer with "thanks but no thanks, I have an even better way to fix that".

What I am attempting to say is that there is no use or need on waiting for permission from someone that did not disallow you in any form.
sure the project is under GPLv2 but no help from outside is under GPLv2 except when it is strictly mentioned from the helper in a written document or something.

In short this issue was opened at begin 2018, which is soon over and yet no answer from all contributors???

Still it is a good thing to ask contributors in email or something for their permission, that is quit polite but in the email they receive should also be mentioned that you have a limited time to answer this request else you are considered to agree with the license change.

top-master on 15 Sep 2018

I agree to changing the license.

yfdyh000 on 17 Sep 2018

👍1

I agree

nna774 on 17 Sep 2018

👍1

From @ziozzang via email:

Yes, I approve.

davidebeatrici on 17 Sep 2018

From @scj643 via email:

Yes, I approve.

davidebeatrici on 19 Sep 2018

@davidebeatrici: what about @el1n, @rel22 and is there anyone else left?

top-master on 23 Sep 2018

@el1n approved the license switch via email.

@rel22's contribution is not covered by copyright because it's a minor change.

davidebeatrici on 13 Oct 2018

May I ask when the final license change is, since it looks like everyone did accept the license change?

by the way, it's EXTREMELY exciting to read this thread
I hope it will switch to Apache 2.0 (or something like that) soon :+1: thanks in advance...

top-master on 1 Dec 2018

Pull request: #832

davidebeatrici on 2 Dec 2018

👍1

Pull request merged.

davidebeatrici on 21 Jan 2019

❤3 🎉2 👍2

Was this page helpful?

0 / 5 - 0 ratings

Related issues

Softether VPN - Strange thing with Upload speed

vampywiz17 · 11Comments

OpenVPN scrambled support ?

fhocorp · 8Comments

Every single connection is shutdown in China.

forever8938 · 8Comments

What naming scheme would the users like to see for releases?

davidebeatrici · 14Comments

[Solved] Error occurred. (Error code: 31)

gulbuhar · 9Comments