The Apache License 2.0 is compatible with the GPLv3 and AGPLv3 but not the GPLv2: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2. Using an AGPLv3-licensed library in an Apache 2.0-licensed program is allowed, but you must follow the AGPLv3 when conveying it, which is incompatible with the Apple app store ToS.
AGPL is a Copyleft license, so how can it be possible to use such library in an Apache licensed program? Isn’t the whole idea of Copyleft to make that impossible? To make sure that nobody can take away users freedoms?
I think what they meant on gnu.org is that you can use Apache licensed code in a GPL licensed program.
The combination of an Apache-licensed program and AGPLv3-licensed library is covered by both licenses, meaning that both need to be followed. This does not change the license of the program itself - the library could be replaced. Somebody could take away the users’ freedoms, but they would need to replace the library.
The Apache License 2.0 is compatible with the GPLv3 and AGPLv3 but not the GPLv2: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2. Using an AGPLv3-licensed library in an Apache 2.0-licensed program is allowed, but you must follow the AGPLv3 when conveying it, which is incompatible with the Apple app store ToS.
AGPL is a Copyleft license, so how can it be possible to use such library in an Apache licensed program? Isn’t the whole idea of Copyleft to make that impossible? To make sure that nobody can take away users freedoms?
I think what they meant on gnu.org is that you can use Apache licensed code in a GPL licensed program.
The combination of an Apache-licensed program and AGPLv3-licensed library is covered by both licenses, meaning that both need to be followed. This does not change the license of the program itself - the library could be replaced. Somebody could take away the users’ freedoms, but they would need to replace the library.