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

OpenTF is now OpenTofu

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 260 posts

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#171

Post by benterix »

emptysongglass wrote: post #146
elorm wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I shed no tears for them and their rich founder who posts tweets of his solo flights to visit his rich friends. Couldn’t keep out a personal dig at Mitchell, who happens to be one of the most unproblematic people at Hashicorp and certainly doesn’t care or participate much in governance ? Seems like a lot of personal feelings were packed into this innocuous-posturing statement.

It wasn't innocuous or posturing. I actually pack my real feelings about a whole range of topics under this pseudonym all the time. And no, I don't particularly like Mitchell.

In this context I don't see your point. If I remember correctly, Hashimoto was the founder/CEO when Hashicorp products were being released as Open Source. Now he is no longer in charge (doing some development work I think) and someone else took the decision to change the license to BSL. So I don't see any relevancy here.

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#172

Post by benterix »

tacticus wrote: post #95
echelon wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dismantling of HashiCorp because they tried to save themselves from Amazon swallowing them is sad. Open Source businesses have no future in a world where big tech can gulp your product for free. The OpenTofu folks will probably even raise capital to support commercialization of their thing at some point.

> The dismantling of HashiCorp because they tried to save themselves from Amazon swallowing them is sad. save themselves from others building a less shit version of terraform cloud.

This will happen anyway; what they could do is to gain some time, that's all. But long-term consequences will be serious, I'm not sure if it was worth it.

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#173

Post by emptysongglass »

benterix wrote: post #169
emptysongglass wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I generally like your takes but this one isn't very good since it wasn't Amazon that was the threat. HashiCorp couldn't compete. Their enterprise offerings were bad and their price quotes were insane and unrealistic. I worked at two companies who rejected them because their pricing was so ludicrous. The TACoS space of small startups nimbly out-competed these bad offerings. Rent-seeking because you weren't able to com…

> Their enterprise offerings were bad and their price quotes were insane and unrealistic. To clarify: the products themselves were and still are very good, with minor quirks. As for pricing, there is a class of companies that set extremely high margins (this doesn't apply just to Hashicorp, see the the pricing of Gruntwork which I believe contributes to OpenTofu). This game reduces the number of customers but also th…

We actually used Gruntwork at a past company over paying HashiCorp for enterprise Terraform. Their prices then were around 5k for a ready to go Reference Architecture. Apart from that one-time cost which we didn't pay because we built an RA ourselves, Gruntwork's prices were extremely reasonable. I don't think the comparison here is fair unless Gruntwork's prices have dramatically changed since then (I just checked: seems the same now as it was then).

I also don't particularly agree with your clarification on my part. I think their products are slim on features especially in light of what you're paying and a Terraform shop should almost always be opting for a TACoS solution over HashiCorp's.

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#174

Post by klaussilveira »

midoridensha wrote: post #35
cube2222 wrote: post #10

Hey! Interim tech lead of OpenTofu here. I'd like to add that as of today (announced just now at OSS Bilbao) we're officially part of the Linux Foundation[0]! Hope you like the new name (it basically won the votes anywhere it was proposed) and happy to answer any questions! [0]: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/press/announcing-opentofu

"OpenTofu" is cute, but tofu has nothing to do with terraforming. How about "Genesis" or "Reliant" or "Marcus" or "Kruge"?

Maybe... Garden of Eden Creation Kit?

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#175

Post by psibi »

Is OpenTofu also planning to maintain the language server (terraform-ls) or is that not within the scope ? I was not able to find any language server related repository.

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#176

Post by prmoustache »

theK wrote: post #140
epolanski wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have mixed feelings about that. Yes, doing money on open source is hard, but on the other hand, the reason why you were successful was because you were open source in the first place and capitalized on millions of hours of free work from unpaid contributors which would've neither contributed nor adopted your product otherwise. Imho, if you can't compete with other cloud offerings of your products then your cloud of…

> capitalized on millions of hours of free work from unpaid contributors Does this hypothesis really hold up? In my experience the contributor community remains small and often even dormant compared to the userbase of an opensource project only to take action if the project itself gets in turmoil (main developer leaves, bad takes on features etc.)

In the case of terraform the main interesting bit is not terraform itself but the modules.

What is the ratio of terraform dev vs third party dev in most popular terraform modules?

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#177

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

ghaff wrote: post #159
FridgeSeal wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve had this argument with people ad infinitum; it seems some people just see “AGPL” and any further thought process just stops. “You could ask or pay for an alternate licence” or “you’re almost certainly not using this in a way that means you need to open source your entire product” and any other rational argument you can think of are just met with “yeah but agpl” and that’s apparently just the end of it.

The thing is, at that point, why not just put it under a proprietary license in the first place? Lots of companies simply don’t have AGPL on their list of legal approved open source licenses and they’re not going to change that for you. ADDED: If you want to go the dual licensing route, at least just state this up front.

Depends on why you want an open-source license in the first place.

If it's to bait in companies to use your product and then offer more features under a proprietary license, then something that's more attractive to companies like a permissive (corporate charity) license is a better choice. If it's to ensure that everyone who uses the software can contribute to the development, something like the GPL or AGPL is better.

There can be other reasons to pick a corporate charity license, of course, but encouraging corporations to use your software is certainly one of the most common.

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#178

Post by assbuttbuttass »

rob74 wrote: post #64
notpushkin wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cute punny name, I like it. Congrats on joining the LF, and keep up the good work!

[flagged]

Adding to the many people who have already recommended tasty tofu recipes, one of my favorites is this crispy tofu recipe from the NYT:

https://cooking.nytimes.com/recipes/1020993-tofu-and-green-b...

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#179

Post by xg15 »

vr46 wrote: post #23

This is too woke for the UK government. Terraform is widely used in the Home Office, I don't think Suella Braverman will approve a switch... (Reference for non-UK viewers: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2022/oct/18/suell... )

I mean.

Whatever else, but you have to give her props for inventing the word "wokerati". That word sounds so ridiculous that it might become cool again.

Re: OpenTF is now OpenTofu

#180

Post by verdverm »

fishnchips wrote: post #170
da39a3ee wrote: post #164

The criticism of hashicorp seems childish. Why shouldn't they restrict the way in which companies make money from their inventions as they see fit? There's a lot of thoughtless entitlement among some of the attitudes being expressed in this debate.

I think at this point we exhausted arguments on both sides of the debate. I think that agreeing to disagree and moving on is a better alternative to competing on ad hominems.

It's easy to say that when it is not your work others are making money on

Just "moving on" is like putting your head in the sand to avoid difficult conversations about financially sustainable open source (which requires an amount of unopen-source if we're going to be honest with ourselves). Donations and charity don't put food on the table for those building the projects.

We have not figured this out as a society, so we should keep talking and debating

Post reply on HN