Live data from Hacker News

Meteor is now MIT licensed

meteor.com

51–60 of 127 posts

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#51

More importantly, how do I keep clients from fucking up my database? How is security being done? Seriously, if I'm not capable of baking limitations into data persistence/logic at the server level then this entire framework is worthless except for building up a portfolio of cute demos that can't be used for any real work.

From their newsletter which just went out, can't find a link online.

"Please make sure it's reasonably secure. Meteor security isn't as hard as people think. Admittedly it doesn't yet have the delicious "candy coating" that the database and DOM update stuff has, but we didn't, like, forget to put any in. Here's what Made With does:

* Use Meteor.publish() and Meteor.subscribe() to control what clients can see (remove the 'autopublish' package first). Actually you may not need to do this for a blog.

* Use Meteor.methods() and Meteor.call() to define secure server functions and call them from the client. Then lock down your app by disabling the "training wheel" methods that let any client do any write."

Also from a quick skim of the server code itself it looks like they are using connect, so you it's possible that you could roll something up using a connect middleware package like everyauth. [1]

That would mean hosting your own server though rather than using the simple meteor deploy.

[1] http://everyauth.com/

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#52
post #31

is there an open source license that says says free to use for people etc.. but if you have a company larger than x then you must support the project with $$$ ?

I don't know of any projects that do exactly this, but there are projects that are dual-licensed. You can either use the code under the GPL or buy a commercial license and use it in your proprietary code.

ExtJS is a great example of this sort of dual-licensing, and I've seen it on other projects as well.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#54
post #51

More importantly, how do I keep clients from fucking up my database? How is security being done? Seriously, if I'm not capable of baking limitations into data persistence/logic at the server level then this entire framework is worthless except for building up a portfolio of cute demos that can't be used for any real work.

From their newsletter which just went out, can't find a link online. "Please make sure it's reasonably secure. Meteor security isn't as hard as people think. Admittedly it doesn't yet have the delicious "candy coating" that the database and DOM update stuff has, but we didn't, like, forget to put any in. Here's what Made With does: * Use Meteor.publish() and Meteor.subscribe() to control what clients can see (remove…

>* Use Meteor.publish() and Meteor.subscribe() to control what clients can see (remove the 'autopublish' package first). Actually you may not need to do this for a blog.

Scoping isn't enough.

>* Use Meteor.methods() and Meteor.call() to define secure server functions and call them from the client. Then lock down your app by disabling the "training wheel" methods that let any client do any write."

So, I can't make a production-grade app unless I use 0% of the magic.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#55
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there is a huge difference between platforms and IDEs

This. I do a fair bit of development of Django using PyCharm. Django is BSD licensed; PyCharm is closed-source. Both are, in my view, amazing tools. Open source platforms are overwhelmingly dominant, awesome, and (at least for web frameworks) licensed as BSD/MIT or equivalent. Open source IDEs are uh... ...let's just say they're an acquired taste, and leave it at that. Since we're talking about Meteor, the proper com…

> Open source IDEs are uh... ...let's just say they're an acquired taste, and leave it at that.

You say PyCharm is amazing. IntelliJ which it is based on is open source. Eclipse and Netbeans, which are generally considered to be in the same league, are also open source. The only IDE commonly considered to be in the same league as these three IDEs with regard to refactoring and feature count would probably be Visual Studio.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#56
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's demonstrably false given how good development tools actually are, particularly open source ones. If anything, too much work goes into open source development tools--certainly much more than in any other category! Just look at how much is accomplished--and how is easily--by various start-ups using open source technology. There are great web servers, web frameworks, libraries, programming languages, text…

I think that's demonstrably false given how good development tools actually are No. Development tools seriously suck. Show me an IDE that can debug multi-client websocket code. Good luck. Every open source IDE's like Eclipse are useless these days because they can no longer keep up with the new problems being introduced. Light Table is maybe the first genuinely new, commercial, development environment to be introduce…

You speak of light table, but that specific project wouldn't have existed without clojure which uses the eclipse license; doesn't this make it a derivative of open source?

Furthermore, ibdknox open sources the majority of his projects...

How can you reconcile with this information? It seems to me that most of the interesting software coming out these days is a product of the open source movement, rather than an attempt to escape from it.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#57
post #46

I feel it is sad that so few HN hackers seem to appreciate the vision of the GPL. GPL needs more indispensable software like this for it to thrive and protect us all from a future of completely locked down computers.

I'm open to a compelling argument for why the GPL is better than a license that basically says "you can do whatever you want with this." (From the perspective of deterring the locking down of computers by corporations.)

Please not here though.

By all means fire up a new thread and I'm sure you guys will wrap this up in no time. But for the sake of the rest of us here to discuss the topic we're discussing, please don't drop a little religious war into the middle of it.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm open to a compelling argument for why the GPL is better than a license that basically says "you can do whatever you want with this." (From the perspective of deterring the locking down of computers by corporations.)

Please not here though. By all means fire up a new thread and I'm sure you guys will wrap this up in no time. But for the sake of the rest of us here to discuss the topic we're discussing, please don't drop a little religious war into the middle of it.

[deleted]

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#59
post #46

I feel it is sad that so few HN hackers seem to appreciate the vision of the GPL. GPL needs more indispensable software like this for it to thrive and protect us all from a future of completely locked down computers.

I'm open to a compelling argument for why the GPL is better than a license that basically says "you can do whatever you want with this." (From the perspective of deterring the locking down of computers by corporations.)

GPL 3 has a clause forbidding the use of GPL 3 licensed code on locked down computers. Googling for "anti tivo clause" will bring up a lot of discussion about it.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#60
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm open to a compelling argument for why the GPL is better than a license that basically says "you can do whatever you want with this." (From the perspective of deterring the locking down of computers by corporations.)

If it isn't obvious, GPL is an attack against proprietary computers and against the corporations that have been trying repeatedly over decades to bottle-up and monopolize the computer revolution.

Is it surprising that the GPL represents the antithesis of the startup community?

No matter how idealistic any large group of young hackers will want to be, fiduciary duty will always trump everything when you play with business. You can love the GPL as much as Stallman himself, but when you're grasping for any edge you can find over your competition, you'll think twice before shipping her a tarball of your source.

Post reply on HN