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

161–170 of 487 posts

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#161

Post by sangnoir »

jfk13 wrote: post #146
sangnoir wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you're completely ignoring the context, which is MongoDB asked OSI to approve their license as "Open Source" - OSI isn't in a position to do so immediately, and so in OSI's estimation, MongoDB isn't "Open Source"

As OSI hasn't yet reviewed the license, perhaps it would have been better for the OSI VP to explain that "MongoDB may not meet the OSI definition of Open Source" than to announce (in CAPITALS, no less) that "MongoDB...IS NOT OPEN SOURCE".

> "MongoDB may not meet the OSI definition of Open Source"

That's just euphemism for "MongoDB is not (certified) Open source". It either is, or isn't; and presently it isn't, for reasons that were entirely under MongoDB's control.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#162

Post by dx87 »

sam0x17 wrote: post #154
vmbrasseur wrote: post #120

Vice President of the Open Source Initiative here. MongoDB submitted this new license for approval by OSI at the same time that they announced that they'd relicensed all of their code. We wish they'd started the process prior to the announcement, but what's done is done. The result, however, is that at this moment, MongoDB is under a non-approved license and therefore IS NOT OPEN SOURCE. As the license review process…

1. The idea that OSI seriously thinks it gets to decide what counts as open source is laughable. This is akin to Linux being released for the first time, and Microsoft issuing a warning that they have not yet verified that Linux is a "real" operating system, and to stay tuned for their final judgement. The arrogance here is hilarious. I've been working in open source for years and I've never, ever heard of OSI. 2. Al…

MongDB submitted their license for approval, so obviously it matters to them. Whether you think it matters or not is irrelevant, you're just some random HN user with no bearing on what society decides open source is or isn't.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#163

Post by kodablah »

aseipp wrote: post #151
kodablah wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Well, that's one way to put it I guess. I personally am OK with anyone taking my work and doing a ton of proprietary development on it. I wouldn't put it out there that way if I wasn't (and don't w/ my proprietary stuff). We need to stop demonizing restrictionless developmen…

> Same with commercial/copy-left development of course, but I'm seeing too much copy-left righteousness these days. I'm not sure what planet you live on, but the GPL and other various copy-left licenses have been on the slow decline for years in part due to things like SaaS negating the use of everything but the Affero GPL and the social 'implications' of using the GPL ("poisonous", "viral"), while the use of extreme…

> I'm not sure what planet you live on, but the GPL and other various copy-left licenses have been on the slow decline for years

The planet that recognizes that proclaimed righteousness (what I wrote about) has nothing to do with adoption (what you wrote about). If anything it makes the righteousness stick out because it goes against what people are choosing. I rarely see GPL devs demonized for how they choose to give their code away, or blog posts and evangelists espousing anti-GPL, or the straggling person "eventually coming out and calling it poisonous", or justifications on non-GPL changes as claiming corporate harm.

I have no statement on license prevalence and it is unrelated to my comment. My statement is about justification used and being overly prideful of their work. Change and be done. One way is not necessarily better than another, and companies are not all bad, and that's not only who you are hurting with these changes, etc. But when I hear complaints about the company using up all their hard work like it's some zero-sum coffer being depleted, I don't pity them. I know the intent is guilt and I don't think it's a good look.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#164

Post by joshsimmons »

sam0x17 wrote: post #154
vmbrasseur wrote: post #120

Vice President of the Open Source Initiative here. MongoDB submitted this new license for approval by OSI at the same time that they announced that they'd relicensed all of their code. We wish they'd started the process prior to the announcement, but what's done is done. The result, however, is that at this moment, MongoDB is under a non-approved license and therefore IS NOT OPEN SOURCE. As the license review process…

1. The idea that OSI seriously thinks it gets to decide what counts as open source is laughable. This is akin to Linux being released for the first time, and Microsoft issuing a warning that they have not yet verified that Linux is a "real" operating system, and to stay tuned for their final judgement. The arrogance here is hilarious. I've been working in open source for years and I've never, ever heard of OSI. 2. Al…

Open source is a term of art with an agreed upon definition, and it has been for 20 years which, not-so-coincidentally, is also when the Open Source Initiative was founded.

The fact that you've never heard of OSI means we've been doing our job well enough that you've never needed to know about it.

The fact that you've never heard of OSI does NOT mean that it's not legitimate, and frankly, that kind of rhetoric is just silly.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#165

Post by enraged_camel »

JaimeThompson wrote: post #139
vmbrasseur wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no fee, and no need to submit any code. The entire approval process is documented on our website: https://opensource.org/approval

I don't see anything on that page with gives you, the OSI, the legal right to declare things as being opensource or not. You categorically stated it wasn't opensource. Had you stated that in your opinion it wasn't opensource it would be different.

>>I don't see anything on that page with gives you, the OSI, the legal right to declare things as being opensource or not.

Sorry, who said anything about a "legal" right?

Maybe you're reading too much into the OP's comment.

Mongo submitted an application at OSI, and OSI is saying that currently, they don't consider Mongo open-source, based on their own definition.

Perhaps you're just confused?

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#166

Post by kodablah »

mintplant wrote: post #158
kodablah wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Well, that's one way to put it I guess. I personally am OK with anyone taking my work and doing a ton of proprietary development on it. I wouldn't put it out there that way if I wasn't (and don't w/ my proprietary stuff). We need to stop demonizing restrictionless developmen…

I don't see much in your argument apart from: I'm okay with this; you shouldn't be self-righteous; don't hate on corporations. Lots of telling me what I should do and how I ought to feel about my work, nothing really backing it up. In which case, I feel justified in simply responding: no, my values are different from yours.

It was more about what you shouldn't do, i.e. guilting others and how they use the software you made available. The values can be different, but that blame is not on someone else.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#167

Post by BFatts »

mpdehaan2 wrote: post #133
vmbrasseur wrote: post #120

Vice President of the Open Source Initiative here. MongoDB submitted this new license for approval by OSI at the same time that they announced that they'd relicensed all of their code. We wish they'd started the process prior to the announcement, but what's done is done. The result, however, is that at this moment, MongoDB is under a non-approved license and therefore IS NOT OPEN SOURCE. As the license review process…

This seems like FUD to me. While OSI may have coined the term "open source" as a reaction to the word "free software" in the past, it did not invent the idea of free software. Rather, the term open source was a reaction to the desire for commerical enterprises to avoid saying software was free. Now it rejects the same argument from developers of software to make a profit, which I find ironic relative to the founding…

But we do need a gatekeeper - that's where you're wrong. Without it, we don't get a fair review of licenses by people most adept at understanding what Open Source is. Without it, we will go back to the wild west of licensing where we have hundreds of OSS licenses that each have their own little clauses and are written by developers, not lawyers, so they don't really hold up in court.

Open Source is for corporations to benefit from FOSS without the need to spend exorbitant amounts to acquire such functionality. But corporations are bound by a set of rules to operate, and as such, so should OSS licenses.

If open source were to revert to the old-style, write your own license if you want to, corporations will have a much more difficult time accepting the new software. OSS will probably die a nasty death, and we will go back to tons of proprietary software running the biggest apps.

The OSI is non-political and for you to argue such is silly. The organization has one goal: to make open source easier for business. What political nature can you see in there? Do they ever restrict anyone from making money off their creations? (The answer has always been NO)

So some developers want to make money on the more advanced features of their open source project. Well, if it happens after software has been around a long time (ala Redis) then people are going to complain. It sucks to have to go from a free model to a for-pay model, but I understand the motivations. I don't think any developer should be kept from making money for their work, but if they want to make money off of something AND control the source, DON'T call it open source, call it proprietary because that's what it is. The source is provided, yes, but that doesn't make it open source. To truly be open source it has to abide by the OSD and Commons Clause definitely does not.

So, is it time for new open source licenses? Maybe, but they should be governed by some committee and the OSI exists so why not them? You're arguing that we should move into an anarchist style of releasing open source... The time has come to make money!! Well, again, that's basically what proprietary software is all about.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#168

Post by papaf »

sam0x17 wrote: post #154
vmbrasseur wrote: post #120

Vice President of the Open Source Initiative here. MongoDB submitted this new license for approval by OSI at the same time that they announced that they'd relicensed all of their code. We wish they'd started the process prior to the announcement, but what's done is done. The result, however, is that at this moment, MongoDB is under a non-approved license and therefore IS NOT OPEN SOURCE. As the license review process…

1. The idea that OSI seriously thinks it gets to decide what counts as open source is laughable. This is akin to Linux being released for the first time, and Microsoft issuing a warning that they have not yet verified that Linux is a "real" operating system, and to stay tuned for their final judgement. The arrogance here is hilarious. I've been working in open source for years and I've never, ever heard of OSI. 2. Al…

The arrogance here is hilarious. I've been working in open source for years and I've never, ever heard of OSI.

I agree with this statement but not in the way that you meant it.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#169

Post by mattl »

jcoc611 wrote: post #121
zokier wrote: post #25

The license is clearly based on (A)GPL which is copyrighted by FSF, and has the following notice: "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed." Does that mean that MongoDB is now infringing on FSF copyright of the license text itself?

My guess is they aren't subject to the license terms because they are the copyright holders. They could do anything with the source code.

This thread is discussing the content of the new license, which is based on the content of the GNU GPLv3 license.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#170

Post by rmc »

vmbrasseur wrote: post #120

Vice President of the Open Source Initiative here. MongoDB submitted this new license for approval by OSI at the same time that they announced that they'd relicensed all of their code. We wish they'd started the process prior to the announcement, but what's done is done. The result, however, is that at this moment, MongoDB is under a non-approved license and therefore IS NOT OPEN SOURCE. As the license review process…

> MongoDB is under a non-approved license and therefore IS NOT OPEN SOURCE.

It might still be open source. It's accurate to say it's not under an OSI approved open source licence, but that's not exactly the same thing.

Post reply on HN