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

231–240 of 473 posts

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#231

Post by gip »

foxyv wrote: post #13
Raed667 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what is preventing AWS from dropping OpenSearch and going back to just selling Elastic ?

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

I think it's nuanced. I'm currently managing an engineering team on an interim basis. During standup I noticed that most engineers were talking about 'elastic' or 'elasticsearch' but one was talking about opensearch. I asked them to clarify that for me and they told me that they transitioned to AWS opensearch but still use the old name for the product often - that might point to the strength of the Elastic brand.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#232

Post by crewdragon »

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…

It feels like Elastic got burnt with the license change, their stock is down 40% since they announced the fork, and they are starting to realize that being open source is important. I don't think AWS would abandon the fork given the amount of efforts they put in, they cannot walk back and re-brand their products.

It's sad to see elastic turning sides for their benefit, and as a contributor I feel betrayed. While OpenSearch on the flip side is more contributor friendly. I honestly feel all energies should be focused on one product to make it better instead of walking in different paths. Amazon has already taken that path and I don't think they will ever walk back, unlike Elastic.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#233

Post by sofixa »

outop wrote: post #100
sofixa wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same applies to BSL and similar. Not being able to compete with the project owners is much less restrictive, for me, than AGPL/GPL.

But it restricts your ability to use a commodity product based on Elastic, provided by a third party who will compete on price or bundle it with other cloud services.

Yes, but what I'm more interested in is self-hosting. I couldn't care less that someone else is unable to profit off of others' work.

And of course the third party can compete on price, they don't have to develop the actual software they're selling!

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#234

Post by asjkaehauisa »

yencabulator wrote: post #128
29athrowaway wrote: post #41

There's already an open source Elasticsearch, it's called OpenSearch and it is pretty much all you need right now. Users that had to pay the price to migrate to OpenSearch do not have a reason to migrate back to Elasticsearch.

Also, OpenSearch is Apache-2 licensed so much more usable.

Also, opensearch is free, enterprise-ready tool. It's 2024 and you have to pay for things like ldap auth in elasticsearch. https://sso.tax/

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#235

Post by globular-toast »

echelon wrote: post #46
everfrustrated wrote: post #16

Too late, the community all moved over to OpenSearch. I'll never forgive Elastic for locking basic security features behind their paid licence. Over the years probably millions of people had their data compromised due to that (due to people inadvertently leaving instances on the public internet - having auth enabled by default would have helped a lot)

Yes, let's praise and reward the hyperscaler and not the small company that is 1% of the size of AWS. AWS got Elastic's goodies for free. They just came in and gobbled up all of that value for themselves like vultures. Meanwhile the people putting in the work effectively got robbed. Small companies should stop doing open source and switch to source available + MAU/ARR restriction clauses.

They shouldn't stop doing open source, they should just make sure they use the correct licence, like AGPL. Businesses will always take as much as they can and give back as little as they can. The "permissive" licences specifically allow them to give back nothing. Cue shocked Pikachu when they do exactly that.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#236

Post by glenngillen »

cortesoft wrote: post #218
ok_dad wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What, when Amazon forked an open source project, as was allowed by the license, and continued to support that open source license even when the original company abandoned theirs? I’m not an Amazon fan, but they did the same thing (forking) that many others do, and they did it perfectly legally according to the license.

No one ever accused Amazon of breaking the law. The issue that Elastic had is that their entire business model was offering a managed elasticsearch solution. Amazon then created their own offering of the same thing, but of course since it is Amazon it was more tightly coupled with AWS and benefited from being a native AWS solution. There was simply no way for Elastic to compete with that. Now, there can be a lot of o…

> since it is Amazon it was more tightly coupled with AWS and benefited from being a native AWS solution. There was simply no way for Elastic to compete with that.

That's one interpretation. I've another, which I've seen play out multiple times now across multiple OSS projects: company invents a thing, thinks that because they're the inventor of said thing they'll be able to sell a managed version of it, belatedly realise that inventing a piece of software doesn't magically make you the best in the world at running it at scale.

What Elastic, and most like them, can't compete with is the ability to run highly available/reliable software at the scale of Amazon.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#237

Post by [deleted] »

sofixa wrote: post #233
outop wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it restricts your ability to use a commodity product based on Elastic, provided by a third party who will compete on price or bundle it with other cloud services.

Yes, but what I'm more interested in is self-hosting. I couldn't care less that someone else is unable to profit off of others' work. And of course the third party can compete on price, they don't have to develop the actual software they're selling!

[deleted]

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#238

Post by pmontra »

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…

> There are a few companies who try to make it sound like if you interact with an AGPL program over a network then your client code is now infected with the AGPL

Of course not, or

1. Any web browser would have to be open sourced, and

2. That would be the consequence of an action taken by a third party (eg: me) and not by the parties that created the web app and the web browser.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#240

Post by nprateem »

mrcwinn wrote: post #76
candiddevmike wrote: post #35

Stock is down almost 25% afterhours (not sure if due to this or their earnings call)

"'We had a slower start to the year with the volume of customer commitments impacted by segmentation changes that we made at the beginning of the year, which are taking longer than expected to settle. We have been taking steps to address this, but it will impact our revenue this year,' said Ash Kulkarni, Chief Executive Officer, Elastic." So, whatever that means, is the answer to your question.

Segmentation changes probably means more companies are in the "not interested" segment now than we'd like. We're going to throw a load of stuff at the wall this year to see what sticks.
Post reply on HN