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

Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 291 posts

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#61

Post by trpc »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #43
trpc wrote: post #24

Can somebody tell me what is wrong is SSPL? I just don't understand what this hostility is all about. A company creates a crucial infrastructure component which is a database, open sources it, everybody can use it for free, cloud vendors started just installing it on their servers or making clones of it and making profit off it, everybody is using a component that took years and millions of dollars to develop but the…

Software licensed under the SSPL is not “free” in either sense of the word. It’s not free as in beer, because I must pay to use it. It’s not free as in speech, because it violates Freedom 0 of the four fundamental freedoms [1]: I can’t run it as I wish, for any purpose. More practically, MongoDB offers their own managed hosting service. Are they paying the Linux Foundation for the OS they’re almost certainly running?…

afaik the user doesn't pay for MongoDB, you can use it freely, read the code, modify; if I understand correctly SSPL is basically AGPL/GPL but with clause that cloud vendors that want to use this product to provide a SaaS version must pay to the maker. I don't think this is any unfair esepcially if this project was made from scratch by the maker and not a fork off another OSS project.

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#62

Post by est31 »

mruts wrote: post #58
benologist wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to see open source developers and companies supported because it's not really tenable to replace all the open source we rely on - we probably need 20 million lines of open source to serve a HTML page. If we were actually enabling and empowering open source developers, and especially the people learning, it would be awesome. Enabling people like Torvalds and Stallman to grow into their role of writing stu…

I dunno, I could do it in 200 of good code in C.

Including kernel, network driver, etc?

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#63

Post by nicoburns »

paulhodge wrote: post #49
codefreakxff wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Postgres supports querying json

Has anyone actually used json-based queries in PG in a nontrivial way, and had a good experience? I looked into it but the SQL syntax for doing json operations was crazy complicated, and I had trouble finding an ORM that did a good job of simplifying it.

What kind of non-trivial use cases do you have. I've found you generally just need to pick out a field using the JSON syntax, then you can use all of the normal SQL tools for fancier stuff...

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#64

Post by dbcurtis »

chrisseaton wrote: post #26
zucker42 wrote: post #20

Serious question: can someone explain why the server side public license is not an open source license, with specific reference to AGPL? Is it because of the provision forcing the source code release of auxillary software used to run the software as a service? As far as I can tell, it meets the FSF's free software definition and the only that seems questionable in the OSI's open source definition is point 9.

> can someone explain why the server side public license is not an open source license Depends on what you think 'open source' licence means. The source is literally openly available. There are just some extra restrictions on what you can do with it. The FSF and the OSI don't own what 'open source' means, of course - the term predates them and comes from intelligence.

> The FSF and the OSI don't own what 'open source' means, of course - the term predates them and comes from intelligence.

You are misinformed, at best.

1. FSF predates the term "open source", that much is true. 2. OSI coined the term "open source." And FSF has has always had issues with that. 3. OSI, on their front page, above the fold, advertises their mission as stewarding the definition of "open source". Again, FSF isn't so keen on that.

In any case, if you want to come up with your own definition of "open source" you are asking to be the third person in a three-way fight. Good luck with that.

Anyway, I have not looked at MongoDB's license. If it is too restrictive for the taste of this or that distro, then I guess it has achieved MongoDB's objective.

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#65

Post by shakna »

zucker42 wrote: post #20

Serious question: can someone explain why the server side public license is not an open source license, with specific reference to AGPL? Is it because of the provision forcing the source code release of auxillary software used to run the software as a service? As far as I can tell, it meets the FSF's free software definition and the only that seems questionable in the OSI's open source definition is point 9.

> “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 software, backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code you make available.

Article 13 requires you make the source code of only vaguely related software available. So if you use a proprietary backup system, or someone else is doing your hosting stack, you can't use the license without breaching.

Having to either own your entire stack or only using FOSS for the entire stack doesn't really fit the "freedom" part of open source.

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#66

Post by wmf »

gwd wrote: post #47
chrisseaton wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> can someone explain why the server side public license is not an open source license Depends on what you think 'open source' licence means. The source is literally openly available. There are just some extra restrictions on what you can do with it. The FSF and the OSI don't own what 'open source' means, of course - the term predates them and comes from intelligence.

> The FSF and the OSI don't own what 'open source' means, of course - the term predates them and comes from intelligence. Ref please? The FSF was certainly around pushing for "free software" long before "open source" was commonly used to refer to copyleft / permissive licenses. And the sole purpose for OSI's existence is exactly to define what is and is not "open source". In any case, it is very important to define t…

OSI hasn't been doing a good job. They're trying to turn it around but only time will tell.

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#67

Post by threeseed »

mfer wrote: post #56
threeseed wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are looking for a document store there aren't many alternatives. And one of the positive elements of MongoDB has been that they acknowledged their many issues and have over the years been fixing them one by one. Whilst alternatives have largely been stagnating. And I am still yet to find any database that even comes close to its single tuple update speed.

Have you looked at postgresql document store? Amazon put a mongodb API on that and made a service after all

1) No that's not what AWS did at all. They implemented the MongoDB API on top of their own storage layer. It doesn't use PostgreSQL.

2) Of course. But MongoDB is orders of magnitude faster in some cases, has better horizontal scalability capabilities, better drivers and some nicer semantics e.g. around streaming.

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#68

Post by chrisseaton »

dbcurtis wrote: post #64
chrisseaton wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> can someone explain why the server side public license is not an open source license Depends on what you think 'open source' licence means. The source is literally openly available. There are just some extra restrictions on what you can do with it. The FSF and the OSI don't own what 'open source' means, of course - the term predates them and comes from intelligence.

> The FSF and the OSI don't own what 'open source' means, of course - the term predates them and comes from intelligence. You are misinformed, at best. 1. FSF predates the term "open source", that much is true. 2. OSI coined the term "open source." And FSF has has always had issues with that. 3. OSI, on their front page, above the fold, advertises their mission as stewarding the definition of "open source". Again, FS…

> OSI coined the term "open source."

The trademark office didn't think so. And ESR said they used the existing term from the intelligence community, which I guess is why.

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#69

Post by lacampbell »

mlevental wrote: post #39
simonw wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SQLite has really good JSON support these days. Any reason not to use that?

as far as i could tell you have to jump through some hoops to use it (compile extension from source?). and i couldn't tell if it supported querying

JSON on Sqlite works out of the box in ubuntu, but it doesn't in OpenBSD. Not sure about other environments.

It supports querying, see json_extract function.

https://www.sqlite.org/json1.html

I use it a lot to return JSON from normalized data, for apps to consume.

Re: Homebrew removes MongoDB from core formulas

#70

Post by threeseed »

floatingatoll wrote: post #42
elamje wrote: post #30

What’s the executive summary of what’s going on with Mongo, and why other commenters are referring to using mongo as a mistake?

Monsanto provides you genetic code packed into a seed and forbids you from profiting from new seeds derived from it by your own work. Is this ethical? Mongo provides you computer code packed into a tarball and forbids you from profiting from new code derived from it by your own work. Is this ethical? Is either example more or less ethical if the price is, or is not, $0? That’s the debate in a nutshell. (I declare no…

Is the GPL ethical ?

It also gives you source code but attaches some pretty significant conditions that in most cases would prevent you from profiting from new code derived from it.

Post reply on HN