The new name clashes with the Open Search Foundation. https://opensearchfoundation.org/
OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
221–230 of 438 posts
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#222Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is really a shame to hear. There was once a an Elastic SaaS company from Norway called found.io that were pretty sharp and customer-centric. They were acquired be Elastic pretty early on[1]. I believe Elastic Cloud was built from this. I guess found.io's culture of delivering a good product didn't survive? https://www.elastic.co/about/press/elastic-acquires-elastics...
Honestly the amount of negativity towards Elastic in this thread is jarring. I’ve been an ES customer (self hosted, some cloud) for years and have only good things to say about them. Maybe I’m less a fan of the number of features they try to bake in and the direction of the company towards using logs for metrics (which causes heavy disk load instead of just storing metrics in time series) but. Yeah. I truly believe t…
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#223Will be interesting to see the resources that AWS will throw at this. You can get a sense of the resource that elastic.co is throwing at elasticsearch at https://public-001.gitsense.com/insights/github/repos?r=gith... I'm currently indexing the fork, so in about an hour or two, I'll provide the insights for the fork as well.
Elastic spends so much time and effort on making sure that their search is performant (and they are not shy about deprecating and removing features that are slow). I think this is where Elastic will continue to shine. It's one thing to add features, it's another to make it so they work well and make sure the integrating product team doesn't shoot themselves in the foot.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
The SSPL directly prohibits offering the software as a service without releasing the source code of your entire operation regardless of if you change it or not: > If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service, you must make the Service Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge... > “Service Source Code” means the Corresponding Sour…
Doesn't a lot of that hinge on what the "service" is? Like, if I run some generic knowledgebase website and use my own ES installation to provide user-facing search, does Elastic want to see my Ansible scripts? Or just the ones related to the search function? If this interpretation holds, I feel like it could be a pretty big problem for companies like GitLab, who not only have deep integration with ElasticSearch, but…
This probably qualifies it as a service, but since it looks like gitlab doesn't install it or redistribute it Elastic isn't going to come after them (if they don't use SSPL code then SSPL doesn't apply). Plus, GitLab is effectively open-source, so they might meet the qualification for using SSPL anyways. Of course, I am not your/a lawyer.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
This argument is part of Amazon's PR campaign to tell devs to not feel sorry for Elastic because it's now a big company and they make money in the market. So, if you built a successful OSS and start to make money then it's ethical to clone any OSS and pushes projects out of the market because now it is "Goliath vs Super-Goliath".
Quite a few companies have proprietary products but have learned to make money selling services. One of them even has a 200B market cap and is called Oracle. Nobody needs to feel sorry for anyone.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
Err, SSPL which Elasticsearch is licensed under isn't AGPL - it's a viral, proprietary license - not quite the copyleft we'd want if we wanted a fair playing field between all actors working on it.
It's a viral open source license, it literally requires open sourcing code, there's nothing proprietary about it except that we allow a council of elitist snots to decide what is and isn't Open Source(TM), and they have decided Google and Amazon support is more important than viable businesses which are building open source businesses.
> The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
And though we're talking about open source instead of free software, without Freedom 0, the software still might as well be proprietary.
Edit: It also violates Rules 1, 5, 6 & 9 of the OSD. So no, let's not call it "open source"
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#227So as someone who has heard about Elasticsearch for years and years, and seen all this, right this moment I've decided to see what it really is. On their home page, "Why use Elastic search?", the reasons are basically: * It's fast! * It does a lot of stuff! * It has some tools to visualize data! * It's distributed!! I have to say this is not very appealing to me since it sounds like something any database could do.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#228So as someone who has heard about Elasticsearch for years and years, and seen all this, right this moment I've decided to see what it really is. On their home page, "Why use Elastic search?", the reasons are basically: * It's fast! * It does a lot of stuff! * It has some tools to visualize data! * It's distributed!! I have to say this is not very appealing to me since it sounds like something any database could do.
Elastic gives you a lot of the fancy stuff that SQL kinda needs extras and hard work for... but it's just a document store with fancy weighting features.
With a particular profile of efficiency choices and interfaces that might appeal to your project.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#229Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
Err, SSPL which Elasticsearch is licensed under isn't AGPL - it's a viral, proprietary license - not quite the copyleft we'd want if we wanted a fair playing field between all actors working on it.
It's a viral open source license, it literally requires open sourcing code, there's nothing proprietary about it except that we allow a council of elitist snots to decide what is and isn't Open Source(TM), and they have decided Google and Amazon support is more important than viable businesses which are building open source businesses.
At this point, they are directly violating that core principle as well as the uncontroversial OSI directive 6 which copyleftists like myself don't really have a problem with... So I'm not sure what the issue here would be other than you dislike the larger companies' involvement in OSS? I think myself and others would appreciate clarification.