Repository navigation
Proposal to switch from AGPL to LGPL license #1385
Description
Hi,
we would like to propose to change the BIMserver license (and it's components like IfcPlugins) to something less binding like LGPL?
The motivation is to improve the legal interoperability of BIMserver with other components inside and outside the ecosystem. Under its current AGPL license, BIMserver cannot be tightly coupled (e.g. via a network connection) with components under other licenses, because any component that is tightly coupled with an AGPL component is required to "inherit" the AGPL license. Since the opensourceBIM proejct includes several GPL- LGPL- and MIT-licensed components, this creates a potential licensing conflict within the project. An issue already mentioned here.
We have been contributing actively and would like to continue doing so. We believe that updating the license would make the project more accessible and strengthen its longterm health and viability for the community.
Thanks
Activity
jovancusic commentedon Nov 24, 2025
I’m looping myself in since we evaluated BIMServer for our project and ultimately decided against it due to the licensing issue. Re-licensing BIMServer under LGPL or GPL would completely resolve this problem.
openMonArch commentedon Jun 19, 2026
The technical feasibility of relicensing BIMserver (and its components) from AGPL to a less restrictive license such as LGPL is not the obstacle here. The codebase is open-source, and the change itself would be straightforward if the will to do so existed. However, the lack of action suggests that the current license is being deliberately maintained, despite its restrictive nature.
This is particularly concerning given that public funds have contributed to the development of BIMserver. Such funding should aim to maximize accessibility, interoperability, and community benefit—not limit it to a narrow circle due to licensing constraints. The current AGPL license creates unnecessary barriers for integration with other open-source projects, which contradicts the spirit of open collaboration and the efficient use of public resources.
If the goal is to foster a healthy, sustainable ecosystem, then relicensing should be seriously considered. The question is not can it be done, but will it be done.