Hacker News Reader

For my money, dual licensed AGPL is the way to go. All source is available under the AGPL, but also available via a paid commercial non-open source license.

The only real drawback is ensuring any outside contributions can be utilized this way, such as with a CLA.

View on HN

That's the thing. You can dual license however you want. But if no one from the outside actually contributes what have you accomplished really? (Other than being able to say you're open source.) Of course, a great many open source projects in general are one person or one organization.

That's what I ended up doing recently [1]. I'm doubtful I would even know if someone did end up breaking the license agreement though.

[1]: https://pl.aiwright.dev/about/license/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com