Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MongoDB switches up its open source license

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 487 posts

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#41

Post by oropolo »

mrkurt wrote: post #33

(Context: I worked on Compose/MongoHQ for a very long time. We were the first to monetize MongoDB) I'm sure people will get riled up about this, but it makes sense. Building a business on an OSS database in a world of behemoth cloud providers is really hard. It's clear Google and Amazon (and maybe even Azure) are comfy taking OSS work, doing a ton of proprietary development on it, and leaving the companies who did al…

> It's clear Google and Amazon (and maybe even Azure) are comfy taking OSS work, doing a ton of proprietary development on it, and leaving the companies who did all the groundwork flailing in the wind.

Have you seen the degree of investment Microsoft has made lately in Open Source? It's an upside-down world where Microsoft if a bigger champion -- and funder -- of open source than a company like Google which was built on Open Source software.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#42

Post by sbr464 »

michaelcampbell wrote: post #21
a012 wrote: post #11

Could this move of Mongodb inc. makes the comeback of the rethinkdb? I hope so

You seem like you know something about rethink. I do not, and couldn't find this information but maybe you know? One irritating feature of Mongo (and I suppose other db's too; orientdb does this) is that once it grabs disk space, it never lets it go. It'll reuse that space, but the OS will never see it again. (EG: If I store 10GB of stuff, and delete 9GB of it, the OS still sees all 10GB of disk used). Does rethink d…

You just need to iterate over the collections calling the compact command. You can create a small script and schedule it.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#43

Post by bad_user »

I hope OSI and the FSF don’t approve their new “SSPL” license.

AGPL style licenses impose restrictions on usage, thus violating freedom 0 in the Free Software’s definition or Open Source’s rule 6.

AGPL should have never been allowed, precisely because it opens the door for commercial entities to eat their cake and have it too, being the kind of license that can be effectively used to disallow commercial products built on top.

In my opinion your own modifications that are never distributed (by the copyright definition) represents mere usage. And we’re software developers after all, personally I patch most of the libraries I end up using and some patches I may contribute back, but I’m definitely not required by any license.

“Open Source” and “Free Software” have great sex appeal, I get it, but if you can’t deal with competitors benefiting from your work, which is the whole point of such an endeavor, then don’t do FOSS.

Go proprietary and be honest about it.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#44

Post by mrkurt »

oropolo wrote: post #41
mrkurt wrote: post #33

(Context: I worked on Compose/MongoHQ for a very long time. We were the first to monetize MongoDB) I'm sure people will get riled up about this, but it makes sense. Building a business on an OSS database in a world of behemoth cloud providers is really hard. It's clear Google and Amazon (and maybe even Azure) are comfy taking OSS work, doing a ton of proprietary development on it, and leaving the companies who did al…

> It's clear Google and Amazon (and maybe even Azure) are comfy taking OSS work, doing a ton of proprietary development on it, and leaving the companies who did all the groundwork flailing in the wind. Have you seen the degree of investment Microsoft has made lately in Open Source? It's an upside-down world where Microsoft if a bigger champion -- and funder -- of open source than a company like Google which was built…

Yeah! It's weird, MS seems pretty well behaved. But they also offer stuff like this, I doubt Salvatore is seeing much benefit: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cache/

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#45

Post by DannyBee »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #28
ReverseCold wrote: post #8

I used to like permissive (OSI) licenses a lot more than restrictive licenses, but now I like copyleft better (for my own projects) because… 1. You’re still helping education, nonprofits, and individuals benefit from your work. 2. It’s still open source, so people will still be able to contribute and use your work in their own projects. 3. Companies that want to use your code to make money can do so, but only if they…

I really like WTFPL as a permissive licence in these cases. Small developers and companies without layers of lawyers will read the licence, see that it says "do what the ---- you want", and use your code accordingly. Big companies with layers of lawyers will read the licence, blanch in terror, and either refuse to use the software, or contact you for alternative terms. Case in point: Google forbids use of the WTFPL.…

So i'm the one who forbid WTFPL at Google, and we forbid it mainly because it's bad for developers, believe it or not.

We go over it in new googler training (and our reasoning is on the Google open source policy site we publish: https://opensource.google.com/docs/thirdparty/licenses/#wtfp...)

You are welcome to not (but if you go and look, it's completely consistent with my viewpoints and history in OSS so ...).

I would love to live in a world where WTFPL is a good license, but we don't live in that world, and wanting it to be so will not change that.

I can also tell you stories of companies we've acquired who had bad experiences, FWIW.

So the "small companies" you think are being served, aren't.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#46

Post by kbumsik »

I personally see why MongoDB switches its license and clarify their original intention of using AGPL.

I even didn't know it was AGPL until now (I'm not MongoDB user). Because so many people seem to use it as if it is Apache License or something free of charge. I haven't see any warnings on AGPL and its implications in MongoDB tutorials on the internet.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#47

Post by mrkurt »

kbumsik wrote: post #46

I personally see why MongoDB switches its license and clarify their original intention of using AGPL. I even didn't know it was AGPL until now (I'm not MongoDB user). Because so many people seem to use it as if it is Apache License or something free of charge. I haven't see any warnings on AGPL and its implications in MongoDB tutorials on the internet.

The drivers are all permissive OSS licenses. It's on purpose, they never wanted to own applications that are built on top of MongoDB, but they never wanted to give away the server bit either.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#49

Post by mbreese »

shadowmint wrote: post #22
vslira wrote: post #18

I'm not an expert in licenses, could someone weight in and explain how the AGPLv3 was being abused? Did the mentioned companies follow the spirit of the license and were getting away with something the company didn't like or were they just improperly distributing the software, regardless of licensing terms? Also: "So while the SSPL isn’t all that different from the GNU GPLv3,(...) [it] explicitly states that anybody…

https://webassets.mongodb.com/_com_assets/legal/SSPL-compare... “Service Source Code” means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service, including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring softwa…

Also from the license, w.r.t. "Corresponding Source" definition:

===

However, it does not include the work's System Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but which are not part of the work.

===

Not that this makes the issue any more clear or enforceable...

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#50

Post by nebulous1 »

DannyBee wrote: post #29
vslira wrote: post #18

I'm not an expert in licenses, could someone weight in and explain how the AGPLv3 was being abused? Did the mentioned companies follow the spirit of the license and were getting away with something the company didn't like or were they just improperly distributing the software, regardless of licensing terms? Also: "So while the SSPL isn’t all that different from the GNU GPLv3,(...) [it] explicitly states that anybody…

Speaking as a lawyer: There was no abuse, there was only mongo not being able to make money in all cases they wanted to. That's what they see as abuse. It isn't. While they complain of bad actors, bad actors always act bad. This will not disincentivize them (they are also often in a lot of interesting jurisdictions that would make it hard anyway). Instead, this is really about making it completely unpalatable for nor…

The article is missing the specifics of what Mongo are saying that others are doing that they won't be able to do under this new licence.
Post reply on HN