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

Elasticsearch is open source, again

elastic.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 473 posts

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#171

Post by remram »

9cb14c1ec0 wrote: post #161

Too late. We just deployed a new project with OpenSearch after learning from an Elastic salesperson that their licensing fees would eat up significant portions of the projects profits. Also, since it's not spelled out clearly, I'm supposing huge parts of vital functionality are still subject to a paid license, even if the core functionality is technically open source now.

Plus they lost all trust now. Who's to say they won't pull the same thing again if developers were to come back? It's not like they stopped requiring a CLA...

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#172

Post by remram »

lolinder wrote: post #95
chadash wrote: post #69

I'm pretty happy with this, since they are keeping the option to use the Elastic License. Now everyone can be happy. To me, it's weird that the AGPL is any more "open source" than the Elastic License. The AGPL requires you to publish all of your source code if you make any changes to the product; the Elastic License just says, "don't use our code to make a direct competitor to Elasticsearch". I find the former to be…

> to publish all of your source code if you make any changes to the product Specifically, this is the text [0]: > if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version There are a few companies who try to make it sound like i…

They define it earlier in the license:

> To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work.

While the AGPL might be untested, copyright isn't, and I don't think any copyright lawyer would say that "calling over the network" is adapting "the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission".

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#173

Post by lolinder »

remram wrote: post #172
lolinder wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to publish all of your source code if you make any changes to the product Specifically, this is the text [0]: > if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version There are a few companies who try to make it sound like i…

They define it earlier in the license: > To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work. While the AGPL might be untested, copyright isn't, and I don't think any copyright lawyer would say that "calling…

I agree with you, and I'm perfectly happy to use AGPL in this way for my own stuff, but my employers have not been.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#175

Post by hluska »

lolinder wrote: post #169
pheatherlite wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For one, we don't have to pay for basic amenities like security and alerts. To heck with gouging the customer for basic feature sets. Aws have their faults, but enabling teams to get the whole elastic experience without the weird nickle and diming is a blessing. Good on Amazon and boo elastic.

This is a reason why you prefer it but not evidence that the brand has overtaken Elastic's.

This evidence can only come from financial accounting. Amazon does not report OpenSearch results separately so you’re looking for data that does not exist in a public form. It’s a waste of time.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#176

Post by reconditerose »

jeppester wrote: post #123
pjerem wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it different than the thousands companies selling you PostgreSQL or Redis services ?

Development of postgres is funded by the companies using it, for instance Amazon. Elasticsearch and Redis are private companies that fund most of the development themselves. When Amazon sell Elasticsearch and Redis, they are in direct competition with its creators. Obviously such a situation isn't sustainable in the long run, and as such both Elasticsearch and Redis (and to my knowledge also mongodb) have changed the…

FWIW, Redis was previously mostly developed by the community but the trademark was acquired by a VC funded tech company. AWS, and other cloud providers like Tencent, were contributing to Redis and they went ahead and changed the license anyways. You can read more about it here, https://lwn.net/Articles/966631/.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#177

Post by lmeyerov »

lolinder wrote: post #80
foxyv wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, the OpenSearch brand has more value now than Elastic.

I see a couple people on here claiming this, but no data to back it up. Elastic beats out OpenSearch by a wide margin on every metric I've thought to check (gh stars, gh stars rate of increase, number of commits, number of pull requests opened, number of pull requests merged, number of issues, stack overflow questions...). Not a single one shows OpenSearch ahead. What metric are you using to come to the conclusion th…

Louie.ai team talks to a lot of sec teams, and new projects generally prefer OS bc openness, and a lot of migrations. Think MSPs etc.

Anecdata, but very real.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#178

Post by jacobr1 »

vineyardmike wrote: post #72
jkaplowitz wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I sell you ElasticSearch(tm) Service which is the actual ES code base, what’s the infringement? A reasonable consumer or customer might be confused into thinking a service named ElasticSearch(tm) Service is being provided by the company behind ElasticSearch. This confusion is exactly what trademarks rather than copyrights are meant to prevent. The trademark law doctrine of nominative fair use allows you to descr…

> A reasonable consumer or customer might be confused into thinking a service named ElasticSearch(tm) Service is being provided by the company behind ElasticSearch. This confusion is exactly what trademarks rather than copyrights are meant to prevent. > you're not reselling the same service as Elastic does; you're offering your own independent version of the service, backed by their technology. To prevent unwarranted…

> Maybe the exact wording matters and the service name was “AWS managed elastic search” or whatever. I’m sure the Amazon lawyers knew how to name it.

Yep, that was the problem, they just called it "Amazon Elasticsearch Service" and it resulted in a lawsuit.

Post reply on HN