RFC: Relicensing Pigsty — Apache 2.0 with AGPL modules

[Vonng]

Hi everyone,

I'm considering a change to Pigsty's licensing model and would like to gather community feedback before moving forward.

Background

Pigsty was originally licensed under Apache 2.0 (v1.x and v2.x). When v3.0 was released, we switched to AGPLv3 primarily due to dependencies on AGPL-licensed components like Grafana, Loki, and MinIO.

However, many users only need the database modules (PGSQL, ETCD, NODE, DOCKER) without the full monitoring stack. For these use cases, the AGPL license creates unnecessary friction — especially for enterprises with strict license compliance policies.

Proposal

I'm considering a modular licensing approach:

Modules	License	Reason
PGSQL, ETCD, NODE, DOCKER, ...	Apache 2.0	No AGPL dependencies
INFRA, MINIO	AGPLv3	Contains AGPL-licensed components (Grafana, Loki, MinIO, etc.)

How it works:

• If you only use the Apache-licensed modules → Apache 2.0 applies
• If you include INFRA or MINIO → AGPLv3 applies to your deployment (since you already have grafana, minio, .... AGPLv3 component deployed)

This is a common pattern in the open-source world and is fully compatible since Apache 2.0 code can be included in AGPL projects.

Why this change?

1. Lower barrier for adoption — Enterprises cares about PostgreSQL itself can use Pigsty's database modules without AGPL concerns
2. Honest licensing — The AGPL restriction only applies where it's actually required
3. Flexibility — Users who bring their own monitoring stack shouldn't inherit AGPL obligations
4. Returning to our roots — Most of the codebase was originally Apache 2.0

What stays the same?

• Full-featured Pigsty (with INFRA) remains free and open source under AGPL
• No features are being moved behind a commercial license
• This is about loosening restrictions, not adding them

Contributor Consent

Since Pigsty was Apache 2.0 before v3.0, relicensing the core modules back to Apache 2.0 should be straightforward for the majority of the codebase.

That said, I want to be transparent and respectful to everyone who has contributed during the v3.x era under AGPLv3. If you have contributed code to Pigsty since v3.0, please let me know if you have any objections to this relicensing. Your contributions remain valued, and I won't proceed without community consensus.

Questions for the community

1. Does this change affect your use case positively or negatively?
2. Any concerns about the modular licensing approach?
3. Contributors: Do you consent to relicensing your contributions as described above?
4. Other feedback or suggestions?

I'll keep this discussion open for a reasonable period before making any changes. Looking forward to your thoughts.