[uvesten]

So, reading the documentation in the [repo](https://gitlab.opencode.de/bmi/opendesk/deployment/opendesk/...) it’s immediately made clear that you should use the Enterprise Edition for production use. (Since the German state is behind this, why not focus on totally free software for production use?)

But what really surprised me are statements like this in the README:

” Nextcloud Enterprise: openDesk uses the Nextcloud Enterprise to the build Nextcloud container image for oD EE. The Nextcloud EE codebase might contain EE exclusive (longterm support) security patches, plus the Guard app, that is not publicly available, while it is AGPL-3.0 licensed.

And

COOL Controller container image and Helm chart: Source code and chart are using Mozilla Public License Version 2.0, but the source code is not public. It is provided to customers upon request. ”

This, according with other paragraphs describing percentages of free and non-free code in certain components really makes me wonder…

[bayindirh]

It's a misconception that (A)GPL source code should be publicly available.

GPL family mandates source code access to people who can access to the software itself. So as long as ICC gets the source code of the NextCloud EE and the Guard app, the GPL is fulfilled.

This is how RedHat operates, and is not a violation of GPL.

Also, this is how you can build a business around GPL. You only have to provide source code to people who buys your software, or you can sell support to it.

Another example: Rock Solid curl [0].

[0]: https://rock-solid.curl.dev/

[drnick1]

But presumably, under the GPL, someone who obtained the source code, perhaps by paying for it, can freely publish that source code, and non-disclosure agreements are void.