[jasonpsage]

so does the 2.d clause mean that if we tweak Processmaker for a service we host etc that does what we want we need to give all our modified code away?

[dstorm]

According to the license you don't have to do this "If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. "

In other cases, yes, free the sources on request. That's the goal of the license, to keep development in motion and give back to the community in a way.

[amosbatto]

It depends how you have "tweaked" ProcessMaker. If you have written a library and call on its functions or have written a plugin, you do not have to publish the code under the AGPL. According to the license, if you changed or added code in the core program, you do have to release that changed code under the AGPL. A reasonable argument, however, can be made that you have no obligation to publish your changes, if you are simply "configuring" ProcessMaker to work for your organization, since you have to change the source code in some cases to get ProcessMaker to work correctly in certain configurations, to change login behavior, etc.

I work at Colosa (the company which makes ProcessMaker), but I have never heard any official guidelines on this issue. Personally, I don't think anyone is too worried about "tweaking"--everyone who works on the code seems to be happy whenever they hear that someone has added a few lines to make it work better and I have never heard any demand that those changes be published. The major concern is clearly that someone will add new functionality the core program and not share back. If you need more clarity on this issue, please email me directly at amos AT colosa DOT com