So selling proprietary versions isn't your goal, but allowing the code to be used in proprietary versions is?

You're walking a very fine line here. One so thin I wouldn't fault anyone who said it doesn't even exist.

Of course, I was just wondering where a ticket could be created so that it's on the record as a feature request.

>We currently have virtkick-starter, a bunch of scripts that set everything up.

Perfect. I'll have a look. Thanks!

Edit: I think we have a misunderstanding. I would like to use VirtKick to provision Guix VMs, not just install VirtKick on Guix.

And you don't feel that the AGPLv3 ensures that...? Or you mean "I don't want my contributions to be distributed under any other license"?

For programs like this, I see little benefit of AGPL over GPL, since the main use-case will be in-house deployments. I can't see how anyone would deploy something like this on the backend, where if you made an in house-fork with bug fixes to support your proprietary infrastructure, you'd have to publish the patches for the wider community. It seems like a big red flag to me.

Exactly! Hence my request for clarification (see above).

If more explanation is necessary: What davexunit is saying is that he wants his contributions to remain free. The AGPLv3 ensures that, even with copyright assignment. But what I guess davexunit really means is that he wants to be sure that all contributors, present and future, are locked into the AGPLv3 forever. I'm not saying the latter is wrong, I'm just saying you should call a spade a spade.