Clarification and suggestion regarding Apache-2.0 vs commercial licensing

Hi,

First of all, thank you for maintaining this project. I really appreciate the work behind it.

I noticed that the repository is currently licensed under Apache License 2.0, while the project also includes a COMMERCIAL_LICENCE.md file that appears to require a commercial license for certain commercial, hosted, or SaaS use cases.

From my understanding, Apache-2.0 generally permits commercial use, modification, distribution, and hosting, as long as the Apache-2.0 terms are followed. Because of this, the current licensing model may be confusing for users and companies evaluating the project.

If the intended policy is that commercial hosting, SaaS, managed services, resale, or similar commercial usage requires a separate commercial license, would it be more appropriate to change the project license from Apache-2.0 to a source-available license such as Elastic License 2.0?

Elastic License 2.0 seems closer to this model because it allows users to view, modify, and self-host the software, while restricting offering the software as a hosted or managed service to third parties without permission.

I’m not trying to challenge the project or its commercial model. I just think clarifying the license would help avoid misunderstanding and make the commercial terms easier to enforce.

Thanks.

Start by reading COMMERCIAL_LICENCE.md and the repository's Apache-2.0 licensing information. Compare the stated commercial, hosted, SaaS, and managed-service terms for consistency. Done means the project’s licensing policy is clarified or an agreed license change is documented.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.