This was a fascinating thread of a product I would possibly have used but now won't...
Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
191–200 of 295 posts
Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
#192Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
#193Hi Matt! I've been using and advocating for Caddy for a while now, but I have to say this is a huge put-off.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm in full support of a commercial version... but as you can see from the feedback here, this kind of thing is really frowned upon in the personal / OSS space for a variety of reasons.
I encourage you to re-consider added headers. Perhaps look at a more heavy handed download process such as the "Pay as you want" system used by ElementaryOS's download page (https://elementary.io/).
Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
#194Such amazing hostility. Open source developers NEVER owe users anything. Never. Stop being so entitled.
I'd agree with you except this is a bait and switch. They're allowed to do it, but it's rude. 30 days is also minimal notice.
Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
#195Just wanted to add that we've experimented with Caddy awhile back and, while it didn't suit our needs at the time, the first impression was a good one and I've since kept the project in the back of my mind. However, the responses from the Caddy folks here and at https://github.com/WedgeServer/wedge/issues/2 have been abysmal and without a clear change in course I'd feel embarrassed to recommend it to colleagues. It's…
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills: the caddy folks come across fine in that issue. In fact everyone does, except for the person who thinks everyone working at a company are on the list of contributors of a github project.
Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
#196@mholt is being exceedingly generous to the whingers on this thread, on top of the generosity he's shown in writing Caddy to start with. It's not 2005 any more, Sun Microsystems is long gone. You won't raise any money from a business model that gives away your best work or selling support contracts alone. Caddy is a real innovation, and brings web server defaults bang up to date - it makes loads of complex configurat…
I agree strongly with this.
If you use Caddy but don't pay for it or contribute to it's development then your criticism of the developers should reflect that imbalance.
Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
#197Hi Matt! I've been using and advocating for Caddy for a while now, but I have to say this is a huge put-off. Don't get me wrong here, I'm in full support of a commercial version... but as you can see from the feedback here, this kind of thing is really frowned upon in the personal / OSS space for a variety of reasons. I encourage you to re-consider added headers. Perhaps look at a more heavy handed download process s…
Thanks for your comments. I think that this thread can be added to the bucket of all the others that reveal the unhealthy expectation in the FOSS community, and I'm not convinced that the "variety of reasons" are compelling.
It's regrettable that our announcement today is so controversial. As much as a donation model is easy and safe, it is not a business plan. (We tried it.)
Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
#198I fully understand commercial licensing, and would willingly pay for it, but I am certainly not paying for software that thinks it's reasonable to inject headers into requests as a form of licensing control.
I've been using Caddy as my default web server for a long time but this is prompting me to switch everything over to nginx. I'm seriously bummed this is the route Matt has taken things. What a shockingly awful surprise to wake up to.
Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
#199@mholt is being exceedingly generous to the whingers on this thread, on top of the generosity he's shown in writing Caddy to start with. It's not 2005 any more, Sun Microsystems is long gone. You won't raise any money from a business model that gives away your best work or selling support contracts alone. Caddy is a real innovation, and brings web server defaults bang up to date - it makes loads of complex configurat…
For the curious or non-British: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/whingers
Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but individuals can just use the OSS version, or something like Netlify which is ideal for static anyway. Pricing that seems expensive to individual developers is pennies for any real business. I regret to inform people, but the world isn't free. Open source is great because it's a low barrier for people getting started with a business or project, but if a company benefits from it they should pay. This sort of…
You're absolutely correct, but it's still frustrating. :( It's totally within rights, and the rates are completely reasonable for funded or profitable ventures. I'm just bummed that I can't quickly grab a Caddy binary and toss it in a container to help host, e.g., a little Bugzilla dashboard / frontend without worrying that I'm violating the "business use" or "internal company use" clauses. I've used Apache, Lighttpd…
I think for anyone interested there'll be lots of docker containers and forks that keep up to date with upstream and simplify getting the binaries.
I feel kind of bad for the authors here, the rollout of this hasn't been perfect. Right now they're suffering the wrath of folks angry at what they perceive as a bait and switch. (Although I think that's a little harsh also, given that you can compile your own for free)
It seems like they would probably have been better selling it as a commerical venture from the get-go as a niche premium version of nginx.
Of course, then it's harder to gain ground that way.