Minio Changes License to AGPL
Why are most software engineers so terrible at basic comprehension? Licenses are just a set of instructions, how do we consistently fail to follow them?<p>You <i>can&#x27;t</i> relicense something that is Apache 2.0 as AGPL. You need explicit approval of every single contributor (whose code still exists in the project).<p>You can <i>also</i> attach the AGPL, but it is <i>not</i> a superset of Apache 2.0, which for example contains constraints that require you to <i>clearly</i> indicate each and every time a file is modified.<p>Incidentally, the Apache 2.0 is a terrible license for modern open source, and it probably shouldn&#x27;t be used.<p><i>EDIT</i>: To people responding, my advice is to <i>read the licenses</i>. Don&#x27;t read a dot point summary, <i>read the licenses</i>. Seriously, <i>read the licenses!</i><p>Sorry, this drives me a little mad.<p>Of course you can include Apache 2.0 code in an AGPL project. The point is contributors contributed their code under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. To use that code, you must meet the terms of that license. You can slap additional requirements on, you can&#x27;t remove requirements.<p>In fact, one requirement is the very fact you can&#x27;t remove the license text itself!