Thank you; I appreciate your clarity and passion.
I'm trying to read the AGPL in the most tricky possible light to see where the exact boundary is.
From what I think you're saying, I could make a service that uses PgDog behind the scenes, which would mean I could modify PgDog without releasing the source code.
However, given most people making PgDog As A Service wouldn't put PgDog directly on the internet, but would put it behind something like HAProxy, or perhaps even a REST API that takes in a SQL query as text and runs it on PgDog. Would either of those options then mean they could modify PgDog without releasing the modification's source code?
That's a good question. To echo the comment above/below, we would have to define what a "direct connection" is.
In my interpretation (and as the founder, I think that matters because I would be the only one who would have any enforcement interest) that means TCP. AGPL says "over network" and that means TCP/UDP. To me at least.
So if you're running a SaaS, the TCP connection is broken by the app layer and all the business logic in between. Your code and proprietary products are safe.
And just to restate my previous point: PgDog is a company. If you want to use the product, we'll make it work.
> AGPL says "over network" and that means TCP/UDP. To me at least.
Ye-es agreed, but wouldn't an interstitial HAProxy or REST API over the top pass this test as well?
I'm not looking to get round your licence; just figure out what exactly you're protecting with it.