Very well put. I already found disgusting what AWS did with Dynamodb (adding key-eviction, etc as a catch-up with MDB) but this is even more hideous.
AWS gives open source the middle finger?
21–30 of 297 posts
Re: AWS gives open source the middle finger?
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every company has the same attitude in my experience, this ins't unique to Amazon. edit: For those down voting instead of just disagreeing provide a company and their policy. All the companies I've worked at have been the same as Amazon more or less and all my friends have similar employment clauses.
California law expressly prohibits this exact policy. If you want to be able to work on open source (that is unrelated to your job, on your own equipment) on your own time, move to Silicon Valley. Even Amazon employees in CA should be exempt from this policy.
...As long as what you work on does not overlap with anything your employer does.
...which is a big problem if you work at Amazon or Google. (Can you think of a single software project that will not intersect any Google project? Are you sure?)
Re: AWS gives open source the middle finger?
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon reserved the right to take ownership of my project and all related IP at any time (including after leaving the company.) I was also forbidden from working with anyone outside of my org on the projects. There were no exceptions allowed. It was considerably more restrictive than any company I've worked at elsewhere.
I'm aware of Amazon's policies. Most companies have similar clauses.
I disagree. My research suggested that Amazon's policies about open source and game development were stricter. (For example, I must be willing to disclose any sales data to Amazon. I must use Amazon products when possible. I must make my project available on the Amazon store if possible.) Most companies also have a process to keep copyright if you need/want to.
Yes, most companies have approval processes. They might even be onerous approvals processes. Amazon expressly forbid me from participating in game jams with people who were not in my org.
Re: AWS gives open source the middle finger?
#24>However, developers are technically savvy enough to distinguish between the real thing and a poor imitation. MongoDB will continue to outperform any impersonations in the market
This feels like a MongoDB sponsored post. How badly would you have to fuck up to be considered a poor imitation of MongoDB?
In any case I don't see how having their own hosted version of MongoDB is a middle finger to open source, but Aurora SQL/PostgresQL isn't. Is Cockroach a middle finger Postgres? I don't consider this any more a middle finger than the SSPL.
Re: AWS gives open source the middle finger?
#25WTF with this title. We all agree API shouldn't be licenseable, but now we expect companies to feel like they shouldn't use API for free because without licensing the source code "it looks bad"?
Re: AWS gives open source the middle finger?
#26> However, developers are technically savvy enough to distinguish between the real thing and a poor imitation. MongoDB will continue to outperform any impersonations in the market This feels like a MongoDB sponsored post. How badly would you have to fuck up to be considered a poor imitation of MongoDB? In any case I don't see how having their own hosted version of MongoDB is a middle finger to open source, but Aurora…
How credible techcrunch should be considered a reliable journalism source here? This one smells pretty much like a money article
Re: AWS gives open source the middle finger?
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every company has the same attitude in my experience, this ins't unique to Amazon. edit: For those down voting instead of just disagreeing provide a company and their policy. All the companies I've worked at have been the same as Amazon more or less and all my friends have similar employment clauses.
Most big tech companies that I'm familiar with allow you to program on your free time, as long as you give them a heads up and it doesn't conflict with the company's products. E.g. working on a video game or contributing to open source.
From what I understand from coworkers from Google and other parts of Amazon the process is pretty similar to get approval outside of games.
Re: AWS gives open source the middle finger?
#28Very well put. I already found disgusting what AWS did with Dynamodb (adding key-eviction, etc as a catch-up with MDB) but this is even more hideous.
MongoDB has a terrible reputation when it comes to scalability and support. If you search you can find a bunch of horror stories.
I don't have any angle to condemn or support this move, but it definitely seems like a response to what AWS customers and the market were asking for: "Give us a managed MongoDB or MongoDB-like service that doesn't suck"
Re: AWS gives open source the middle finger?
#29Amazon was using MongoDB without paying for it.
MongoDB found that objectionable, and changed the license such that Amazon would either have to pay, or stop using it.
Amazon stopped using it, and started using its own in-house implementation instead (presumably because it was cheaper to develop it than to pay MongoDB).
So, MongoDB got exactly what they asked for. It's just that, when they forced Amazon to make a choice, they didn't expect one of the options they gave them to be viable. They were wrong.
I don't see how Amazon is in the wrong here. They are no longer using MongoDB for free, as the authors demanded. They did not reuse any code. They are not advertising their replacement as MongoDB, either.
Is it because of API compatibility? But the notion that one cannot reimplement a public API for the sake of compatibility is in and of itself extremely hostile to the F/OSS ecosystem, given how many products in it are reimplementations of proprietary APIs.
Re: AWS gives open source the middle finger?
#30> However, developers are technically savvy enough to distinguish between the real thing and a poor imitation. MongoDB will continue to outperform any impersonations in the market This feels like a MongoDB sponsored post. How badly would you have to fuck up to be considered a poor imitation of MongoDB? In any case I don't see how having their own hosted version of MongoDB is a middle finger to open source, but Aurora…
It’s clearly presented as a quote from mongoDB’s CEO.