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

MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

access.redhat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 231 posts

Re: MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

#201

Post by statictype »

013a wrote: post #194
brazzledazzle wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll never understand why we collectively wag our fingers at individuals or companies that try to keep the likes of Amazon from building a profitable service off of their hard work then contribute back little-to-nothing. Would redis, mongodb and dgraph have even considered alternate licensing if companies like Amazon had thrown them a minuscule amount of funding and patches? We can’t know because they didn’t. And the…

The bigger concern should be that databases like MongoDB and Redis are part of an older breed. The newest databases, built to handle the most demanding load, like DynamoDB, Aurora, or CloudSpanner, are intimately tied to the cloud providers they're deployed on, for legitimately necessary reasons. As the world gets more complex and demanding, this old model of "I've got a server, lets put a database on it" just doesn'…

>But they are interested in the API, because that's what their customers are using.

The API is very much a part of the product. It's effectively the UI for the service.

Small companies like Mongo and Elastic can't compete on scale but they can compete on interface design.

If it's ok for the giant providers to just take their interface design and rip it wholesale then you are cutting off the market for new database engines.

Aurora and DynamoDB have been around for ages. If it's objectively superior, then why did they feel the need to make a MongoDB compatibility layer?

Because despite being 'superior', people were still using MongoDB.

A database engine is more than just the backend. The developer-facing side is just as important - if not more so.

Re: MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

#202

Post by amenod »

kstrauser wrote: post #103
amenod wrote: post #93

I am really torn about this news. On one hand MongoDB's change of license is a clear attempt to discriminate against a set of users, so it is clearly non-free. On the other hand I know it is really difficult to make a sustainable business by developing an opensource product, especially since there are companies (like Amazon) who will take successful opensource projects and offer them as a service, or simply offer a c…

PostgreSQL is used much more widely than MongoDB, and has a much freer license. Lots of people make money developing and supporting PostgreSQL. I also content that MongoDB built their project on top of a mountain of Free Software. It rings a little hollow to me when they complain that others are making money from using their software, when the MongoDB team is also making money from using others' software. Last I chec…

> ... Lots of people make money developing and supporting PostgreSQL.

Postgres is definitely an actively developed and very useful project, but I must admit I have no idea how the development is financed. It seems there is a non-profit collecting donations, for example EnterpriseDB seems to employ "key community members" [0]. And Amazon is listed among sponsors [1], though it is weird that they are so low on the list (from my limited experience most cloud use of Postgres is via RDS @ AWS).

So basically donations?

[0] https://www.enterprisedb.com/enterprisedb-community-particip... [1] https://appdevelopermagazine.com/why-citus-data-is--donating...

Re: MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

#203

Post by bad_user »

brazzledazzle wrote: post #188
giancarlostoro wrote: post #22

It seems[0] the new MongoDB license is basically non-free and it would make no sense to include it in RHEL8. I hope Debian and other distros follow suit as a result if they come in agreement. It's sad that the license change all resorts to greed basically, as if Oracle took over MongoDB. If I were to ever use a NoSQL database for a new project I'd aim for MIT / 2-clause BSD based projects instead. PostgreSQL has no i…

I’ll never understand why we collectively wag our fingers at individuals or companies that try to keep the likes of Amazon from building a profitable service off of their hard work then contribute back little-to-nothing. Would redis, mongodb and dgraph have even considered alternate licensing if companies like Amazon had thrown them a minuscule amount of funding and patches? We can’t know because they didn’t. And the…

You can point at Amazon all you like, but this isn’t Open Source or Free Software.

If you want to prevent others from using your “hard work”, then go with a proprietary license, but don’t pretend your proprietary license is FOSS because that’s hypocritical and many of us care about the guaranteed freedoms of FOSS, including making money off of other people’s hard work.

MongoDB is trying to eat their cake and have it too and I have no sympathy for that. New versions of MongoDB are no longer Open Source and that should be known, because it won in the marketplace by being FOSS and now is the time to consider alternatives.

Re: MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

#204

Post by _pmf_ »

brazzledazzle wrote: post #188
giancarlostoro wrote: post #22

It seems[0] the new MongoDB license is basically non-free and it would make no sense to include it in RHEL8. I hope Debian and other distros follow suit as a result if they come in agreement. It's sad that the license change all resorts to greed basically, as if Oracle took over MongoDB. If I were to ever use a NoSQL database for a new project I'd aim for MIT / 2-clause BSD based projects instead. PostgreSQL has no i…

I’ll never understand why we collectively wag our fingers at individuals or companies that try to keep the likes of Amazon from building a profitable service off of their hard work then contribute back little-to-nothing. Would redis, mongodb and dgraph have even considered alternate licensing if companies like Amazon had thrown them a minuscule amount of funding and patches? We can’t know because they didn’t. And the…

> And then we sneer at them for having the audacity to try to stay open but stop these giants from using them and throwing them away.

I'm sneering at the bait and switch. For what it's worth, MongoDB may have taken away business from more competent competitors that were upfront about being commercial projects. Given the nature of the database space, this has certainly been the case.

Re: MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

#205

Post by grumpydba »

merlynn wrote: post #137
giancarlostoro wrote: post #22

It seems[0] the new MongoDB license is basically non-free and it would make no sense to include it in RHEL8. I hope Debian and other distros follow suit as a result if they come in agreement. It's sad that the license change all resorts to greed basically, as if Oracle took over MongoDB. If I were to ever use a NoSQL database for a new project I'd aim for MIT / 2-clause BSD based projects instead. PostgreSQL has no i…

Michael from MongoDB here... Greed? You realize that anyone can still view, download, use, develop, modify and do everything they could do prior to the change - right? The only difference is that if they decide to offer the licensed software as a public service they must release the other components of the service under the same license.

There are several closed licenses which allow you to do that. Mongodb now uses one of those closed licenses.

The wording is so vague that this license is incredibly toxic, no one in their right mind would consider using it.

Seriously, is that all you IP lawyers can come up with ?

Re: MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

#206

Post by _msw_ »

brazzledazzle wrote: post #188
giancarlostoro wrote: post #22

It seems[0] the new MongoDB license is basically non-free and it would make no sense to include it in RHEL8. I hope Debian and other distros follow suit as a result if they come in agreement. It's sad that the license change all resorts to greed basically, as if Oracle took over MongoDB. If I were to ever use a NoSQL database for a new project I'd aim for MIT / 2-clause BSD based projects instead. PostgreSQL has no i…

I’ll never understand why we collectively wag our fingers at individuals or companies that try to keep the likes of Amazon from building a profitable service off of their hard work then contribute back little-to-nothing. Would redis, mongodb and dgraph have even considered alternate licensing if companies like Amazon had thrown them a minuscule amount of funding and patches? We can’t know because they didn’t. And the…

I think there's an echo?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18690666

Re: MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

#207

Post by bad_user »

metheus wrote: post #176
gnulinux wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but both free software and open source are well defined terms MongoDB doesn't have power to redefine (sorry guys). It's good to be principled because then you make fewer arbitrary decisions along the way. Your new license isn't free nor open; it's just a custom proprietary license that allows people see the source code and fork; just like freeware software can be "for gratis" but it's never "free software" or "o…

I also work for MongoDB. I respect your opinion about whether the SSPL is free or open, but it is not one that is uniformly shared by the OSI, as evidenced by the discussion currently underway in the license-approval mailing list. Many have argued in its favor. On that basis, some of your assertions in paragraph one are subjective. Not that there’s anything wrong with subjectivity! I think it is valid to ask the ques…

Businesses have to survive in a competitive market, I get it, you don't have to apologize for it and it's not greed, it's just how the market works.

That said, you did not work with OSI or the FSF before changing the license. And your company is not the only contributor to MongoDB, you have third party contributors as well, who did not have a say in it, because of the copyright attribution that you require.

In other words, you did not collaborate with OSI or the FSF and you screwed your contributors.

It's good that you're now waiting on feedback from OSI, but the damage to the FOSS ecosystem was already done.

Re: MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

#209

Post by xorcist »

statictype wrote: post #201
013a wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bigger concern should be that databases like MongoDB and Redis are part of an older breed. The newest databases, built to handle the most demanding load, like DynamoDB, Aurora, or CloudSpanner, are intimately tied to the cloud providers they're deployed on, for legitimately necessary reasons. As the world gets more complex and demanding, this old model of "I've got a server, lets put a database on it" just doesn'…

>But they are interested in the API, because that's what their customers are using. The API is very much a part of the product. It's effectively the UI for the service. Small companies like Mongo and Elastic can't compete on scale but they can compete on interface design. If it's ok for the giant providers to just take their interface design and rip it wholesale then you are cutting off the market for new database en…

> then you are cutting off the market for new database engines

No, you're really, really not. There is plenty of opportunity for innovation still.

Should basic APIs be considered intellectual property we'd be in for some real trouble as an industry.

Re: MongoDB removed from RHEL 8 beta due to license

#210

Post by [deleted] »

threeseed wrote: post #120
Twirrim wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not pick a mature database software, learn to use it properly, and just get on with life? Why would you risk _anything_ to immature databases?d

It's a 9 year old database. Can you be more specific about what makes it immature ?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN