Congrats to the Infisical team, it's been cool getting to watch them grow from the start.
What are some of the biggest challenges you've run into so far?
Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
11–20 of 109 posts
Re: Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
#12Does Infisical support an HSM?
Re: Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
#13Congrats to the Infisical team, it's been cool getting to watch them grow from the start. What are some of the biggest challenges you've run into so far?
i’m also interested in this.
also how’s it going with loops?
Re: Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
#14Congrats to the Infisical team, it's been cool getting to watch them grow from the start. What are some of the biggest challenges you've run into so far?
Prioritizing feature requests and providing good quality support takes a lot of time and effort... You can check in our Slack (https://infisical.com/slack) that we try to reply to everyone within a couple minutes. This is definitely the biggest one, but it's worth it IMO!
Re: Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
#15Backed by another corporation trying to monetize it. This will go well. This repo available under the MIT expat license, with the exception of the ee directory which will contain premium enterprise features requiring a Infisical license. I just sprained my eye sockets from rolling my eyes too hard.
What's wrong with monetization? You understand that OSS's significant problem is a lack of funding, where authors don't want or don't know how to monetize their product?
Sentry looks like a good model for OSS, and it's proof that you can make a living from OSS. I also don't have anything against "enterprise features" for which you need a license, while most features are available in OSS version.
Re: Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
#16Backed by another corporation trying to monetize it. This will go well. This repo available under the MIT expat license, with the exception of the ee directory which will contain premium enterprise features requiring a Infisical license. I just sprained my eye sockets from rolling my eyes too hard.
I think OSS core + proprietary components (which can be replaced by OSS alternatives) is much less evil business model than what Hashi did: forced contributors to give up copyright and then locked everything under business license.
There are many examples of such approach: Spark/Databricks, Cassandra/Datastax.
Re: Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
#17Backed by another corporation trying to monetize it. This will go well. This repo available under the MIT expat license, with the exception of the ee directory which will contain premium enterprise features requiring a Infisical license. I just sprained my eye sockets from rolling my eyes too hard.
What's wrong with monetization? You understand that OSS's significant problem is a lack of funding, where authors don't want or don't know how to monetize their product? Sentry looks like a good model for OSS, and it's proof that you can make a living from OSS. I also don't have anything against "enterprise features" for which you need a license, while most features are available in OSS version.
This is indeed what we are going for. We want to provide a very predictable license that gives most of the features for free for developers while keeping the managerial features paid to make sure that we can support development and maintenance of Infisical.
Re: Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
#18Backed by another corporation trying to monetize it. This will go well. This repo available under the MIT expat license, with the exception of the ee directory which will contain premium enterprise features requiring a Infisical license. I just sprained my eye sockets from rolling my eyes too hard.
What's wrong with monetization? You understand that OSS's significant problem is a lack of funding, where authors don't want or don't know how to monetize their product? Sentry looks like a good model for OSS, and it's proof that you can make a living from OSS. I also don't have anything against "enterprise features" for which you need a license, while most features are available in OSS version.
> What's wrong with monetization? You understand that OSS's significant problem is a lack of funding, where authors don't want or don't know how to monetize their product?
> Sentry looks like a good model for OSS, and it's proof that you can make a living from OSS.
Sentry is using the BSL, the very same license that HashiCorp has switched to but that change has not been received well.
Re: Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
#19I remember trying Infiscal, and I was excited to see how good it is, the feature list in the OSS version, and its ease of use... What cooled me off is this limitation in OSS: "3 Infisical Projects, 3 Environments & 5 Team Members."
That's not nice. It's OK to limit SSO access to OSS and stuff like that. But limiting essential features - team members is a no-go.
Re: Infisical – open-source HashiCorp Vault alternative
#20I remember trying Infiscal, and I was excited to see how good it is, the feature list in the OSS version, and its ease of use... What cooled me off is this limitation in OSS: "3 Infisical Projects, 3 Environments & 5 Team Members." That's not nice. It's OK to limit SSO access to OSS and stuff like that. But limiting essential features - team members is a no-go.
This is very strange. There is no such limitation. You can create as many projects and environments as you need. You can also add an unlimited number of users