No plans on a Docker compose for now, but feel free to submit an issue. RE licensing, there’s some discussion on it below. FOSS describes software licensing, which is all MIT. There are 2 features “gated” behind a license check, which supports development and gives the convenience of a ready-made build (which have costs involved). But all code is open, and you’re welcome to modify/fork out if you prefer to run your own.
Thank you! Appreciate that. Would love to hear your thoughts when you get to spin it up!
Sure, my original thought was that GPLv3 would ensure that contributions/forks would at least remain open. Which seems novel, but 1) Realistically I probably wouldn’t have any way to enforce it, and 2) GPL is terrible for businesses, and might block genuine contributors. E.g. a company who wants to write an internal plugin/extension, would be forced to open-source it under GPL, which might not be feasible. So they either don’t use/contribute at all, or might build it themselves from scratch. Especially with AI these days, code is cheap and its easy to “reproduce” entire codebases in a fraction of the time. MIT just simplifies, and makes it fully permissive instead.
Sure, like most projects I use AI assistance a lot for most of my work these days, ngl. Its helps me plan, research and code new ideas/features and makes a lot of my work easier. Having said that, I fully understand and share people’s feelings about yolo, vibe-coded slop. I’ve been a software engineer for 20+ years. AI helps with a lot, but also feels like the honeymoon phase is wearing off actually. It doesn’t give me the joy of building stuff. I still test, review and ship everything myself. You can check my Github history that I’ve been doing this way before recent AI hype.
Either way, the idea and execution is 100% me. I’m building something I want, use, and care about myself. Whether I’ve used AI is not too relevant, imo. It’s that all alternatives have been caught selling your data (Unroll), heavily rely their centralized services or require you to give up your data in order to remove it. Which is ironic. Paperweight is the only tool I’m aware of that does this entirely local and is open-source.
P.S if its quality you’re worried about, Paperweight has been audited through Google’s CASA assessment and Apple’s developer verification (admittedly, not a super high bar).
Hi, nice to see you here! Would love to hear your thoughts. And thanks for standing up in the comments. Much appreciated :)
Correct. But all code is there, so you can fork them out yourself if you want.
Thanks for the reply! And good question. Yes, all code, including all paid features are open source too. Not just open core. There’s nothing proprietary. Some of the paid features are gated behind a license check, but it’s all part of the same repo and MIT licensed. It’s all there to inspect or fork if you want. The perpetual license however helps support development and gives the convenience of a ready-made build.
We actually moved recently from GPLv3 to MIT to be fully permissive.
That’s fair. I’m still experimenting with pricing/licensing models, so appreciate the feedback. To be clear, the license grants you permanent use and at least all updates, including V1 which is documented on Github. Not making any promises what’s after yet, because in all honesty. I don’t know yet what a V2 or other features would look like. Just trying to be transparent on what you’re getting right now + upcoming updates. We’ll see what’s after, and open to ideas