[Freeswitch-users] Enterprise/Production Quality?

[Matthew Grooms]

I'd like to hear how the organization supporting the Advantage program 
views the legality of distributing patches to MPL code to program 
partners but not the community. Isn't that one of the core properties of 
the MPL license? Sure, you can link non-MPL software to it if you create 
a separate commercial module from whole cloth. But if you modify MPL 
code with the intent to distribute outside the boundaries of your 
organization, my understanding is that you must freely publish those 
modifications to all. Dual licensing software is a simple matter if you 
own 100% copyright to the code. You absolutely have the right to do that 
( see Qt's GPL vs commercial license ). But to re-license code that is a 
collection of patches from multiple authors, you need the consent from 
all of those that have contributed before changing that license. A lot 
of projects have gone through the pain of re-licensing code and it 
involved reaching out to all contributing parties and gaining their 
consent ( search the mailing lists of the Xen project or Wine for 
examples ).

All that being said, I completely understand the need for a commercial 
arm of a software project. You can't feed your family on good will. I 
don't think anyone would argue that it shouldn't be done. But a typical 
model for this involves additional commercial module offerings and 
commercial support offerings. Can you help us understand how your early 
release program works with respect to code code that's licensed under 
the MPL?

Thanks,

-Matthew


On 5/30/2018 12:28 PM, Tom Hartnett wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:35 PM, Michael Jerris <mike at jerris.com 
> <mailto:mike at jerris.com>> wrote:
>
>     Michael-
>
>     This is a specific bug that I know we have fixed.  We spent months
>     of work tracking it down, I am very familiar with the issue.  This
>     issue is not at all with verto, and is specifically with the sip
>     secure web socket support.  We have never recommended the use of
>     sip web socket support for webrtc, we think that verto is
>     typically a better solution, and is more stable.
>
>     Mike
>
>>
> Where is this recommendation posted? The Freeswitch 1.8 textbook seems 
> to imply they are equally usable.
>
> As a Freeswitch implementer I agree the optics of this aren't very 
> good. I'm happy to treat FS as a commercial offering and evaluate it's 
> value on that basis, if that's what it has become. But touting it as 
> OSS then not supporting key bug fixes to the OSS community isn't 
> really a good look.
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Professional FreeSWITCH Consulting Services:
> consulting at freeswitch.org
> http://www.freeswitchsolutions.com
>
> Official FreeSWITCH Sites
> http://www.freeswitch.org
> http://confluence.freeswitch.org
> http://www.cluecon.com
>
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
> http://www.freeswitch.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20180530/51a701a5/attachment-0001.html>