look all my shit gets copyleft licenses but this is why people have jellyfin servers today and not emby ones. if you want to paywall features for self-hosters, you can’t publish your source. simple as
I’m not really following what you’re on about or what’s “materially the same thing”. Regardless,
People publish GPL and AGPL code with paywalls all the time. You could fork bitwarden and remove the paywall. But why bother when vaultwarden already exists, has no paywall and uses less server memory? Its basically the Jellyfin to Bitwarden.
wot if you publish your selfhosted fork that has the paywall removed?
This is allowed. The most common method though is to sideload some
.dllfiles which is an AGPL violation.yeah but materially it’s the same thing.
look all my shit gets copyleft licenses but this is why people have jellyfin servers today and not emby ones. if you want to paywall features for self-hosters, you can’t publish your source. simple as
I’m not really following what you’re on about or what’s “materially the same thing”. Regardless,
People publish GPL and AGPL code with paywalls all the time. You could fork bitwarden and remove the paywall. But why bother when vaultwarden already exists, has no paywall and uses less server memory? Its basically the Jellyfin to Bitwarden.