• woelkchen@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The (A)GPL has no problems with the app store. It merely requires that users must be able to install altered versions and that’s certainly possible. It’s the app store policies by Apple that forbid GPL apps.

    Missing a CLA seems like an oversight, releasing the public code under a license forbidden by Apple’s terms is most likely a deliberate choice to block competing app store submissions. They’d just use LGPLv2.1, Apache License 2, or so.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t think Apple’s terms are problematic.

        The VLC people had to contact many authors to relicense libVLC to LGPLv2.1 because it would otherwise not be compliant to Apple’s terms. Surely the details are documented somewhere.

          • woelkchen@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            That’s because VLC took external contributions, and therefore couldn’t relicence the software by themselves.

            “As I understand Apple’s terms, GPL code isn’t actually prohibited”

            No relicensing would have been required if your understanding was correct. That said, I have a slight headache and that’s why I’m not looking it up myself.

    • dukk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      From the README:

      Feel free to take a look around. We are not yet taking patches as we still have a little bit of tidying up to do. When we do, there will be a contributor license agreement.

      So yeah, looks like there will be a CLA.