Another comment on AGPL: I both wish that the AGPL became a often-used license and that when required commercial options would be affordable. Obviously developers control the licensing and costs of their creations, but as a for instance, if I could not use AGPL on a customer project: I would be happy to pay about $25 for a VPS license or perhaps $100 for a single server license for good bits of infrastructure software that work better, are more efficient, etc. On the other hand, the neo4j AGPLed project is awesome, I will use it for my own AGPL projects, but the $1000/server cost will probably keep me from being able to use it on customer projects (but maybe not, depending on their budgets).
Sorry for the long rant here, but I would like to see a healthy atmosphere for developers producing quality AGPL projects and the community accepting that they need to pay up reasonable fees for non-AGPL use.
That's a very good comment, and thanks. I mostly went with the AGPL to hedge my bets. It's much easier to reduce a license's restrictions than to increase them later, and I'd like to go with whatever the market wants at the time.
The interesting thing is, other people have had the same sentiment about the AGPL. It seems they actually prefer it plus some small commercial license option. I hadn't really thought people would like the AGPL for servers, but it seems that's what people are liking.
At this point I have no idea which direction it'll go, but I'll make a decision once it's more stable and actually runs stuff.
Sorry for the long rant here, but I would like to see a healthy atmosphere for developers producing quality AGPL projects and the community accepting that they need to pay up reasonable fees for non-AGPL use.