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

We Are Changing the License for Akka

lightbend.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 360 posts

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#241

Post by balfirevic »

josephcsible wrote: post #164
zozbot234 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Clearly other’s use of that code wasn’t very sustainable, since the author now says they will no longer maintain it for free. You are not entitled to ongoing, continued maintenance of any FLOSS project. If you have such needs, you can get paid support or fork the project and maintain it yourself.

> You are not entitled to ongoing, continued maintenance of any FLOSS project. If it were just no longer being maintained, nobody would be nearly as upset. But it is still being maintained; it's just no longer FLOSS.

The version prior to license change is as open source as ever and unmaintained.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#242

Post by mannykannot »

josephcsible wrote: post #164
zozbot234 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Clearly other’s use of that code wasn’t very sustainable, since the author now says they will no longer maintain it for free. You are not entitled to ongoing, continued maintenance of any FLOSS project. If you have such needs, you can get paid support or fork the project and maintain it yourself.

> You are not entitled to ongoing, continued maintenance of any FLOSS project. If it were just no longer being maintained, nobody would be nearly as upset. But it is still being maintained; it's just no longer FLOSS.

Those who would have been less upset by it becoming no longer maintained can simply fork and proceed as if that were the case.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#243

Post by origin_path »

xani_ wrote: post #197

Pre reading: Is it because VC funded company needs to show returns ? https://www.crunchbase.com/funding_round/typesafe-series-d--... post-reading: ...probably

All companies need to show returns, otherwise they run out of money and die. Not sure what VC funding has to do with this except, perhaps, making the "live open or die" model seem attractive at the start.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#244

Post by wmf »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #238

It seems to me that open source/ free software might be in its death throes. Can anyone name a recent open source library or program that is widely used and community controlled beside Linux? Open source now mainly serves as a way for trillion dollar companies to pool resources to develop software they all need and minimize how many developers they need to hire (see Linux). We have seen again and again how open sourc…

a way for trillion dollar companies to pool resources to develop software they all need and minimize how many developers they need to hire

I don't see any problem with that as long as the companies are paying the developers, which they are in most cases. Major open source like Linux and k8s haven't been developed by volunteers for decades.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#245

Post by origin_path »

that_guy_iain wrote: post #162
kryptiskt wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bait and switch is never nice, whether Google does it or putative open source projects. A lot of developers work for companies that has more than $25M in revenue, and now a ton of them is going to get shit from management because they added this cuckoo egg dependency back when it used an open source license. I have no problem with companies using whatever license, I do have trouble with them getting traction being op…

> I don't use Akka, but I feel the pain of the people who did that and now has to tear the thing out. I highly suspect very few will ahve to tear it out. It'll cost more money to replace than it would to pay license fees for many companies. Developer time costs money. > Because I don't see how anyone would want to use it, that pricing is completely ridiculous. No one should pay per vCPU, much less those extortionate…

Technically they make a lot of revenue. The $25M threshold isn't a threshold on profitability, just company size. They could be losing money.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#246

Post by beebmam »

colordrops wrote: post #235
cutierust wrote: post #229

It's easy to dictate morals for others. How about let oss be voluntary and thank people for giving what they did in the past?

Build a free bridge across a river, which allows a town to grow on the other side, then shut down free access to the bridge. The builders are entitled to do this, but doesn't make it the right thing to do.

What is the problem with wanting to be paid for your labor?

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#247

Post by a_c »

I had used akka several years before for a commercial project. It worked wonder for me. Personally I have no issue with their change of license. Author has authority, as simple as that. I'm willing to pay for something useful. People seem to take a moral high ground when it comes to software.

If someone decide to make some useful project opensource. Full respect. If they changed their mind later to make the project proprietary, still full respect. It's like some kind neighbour decides to clean the street for free because it makes the neighbourhood cleaner for everyone. We are not in position to demand the status quo but be grateful of.

There are many projects I would happily pay for. Nginx, zeromq, django, react, elasticsearch, to name a few.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#248

Post by braingenious »

colordrops wrote: post #235
cutierust wrote: post #229

It's easy to dictate morals for others. How about let oss be voluntary and thank people for giving what they did in the past?

Build a free bridge across a river, which allows a town to grow on the other side, then shut down free access to the bridge. The builders are entitled to do this, but doesn't make it the right thing to do.

Build a free bridge across a river, leave it in place and invite others to maintain it. Build a separate toll bridge.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#249

Post by colordrops »

beebmam wrote: post #246
colordrops wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Build a free bridge across a river, which allows a town to grow on the other side, then shut down free access to the bridge. The builders are entitled to do this, but doesn't make it the right thing to do.

What is the problem with wanting to be paid for your labor?

I don't understand how your question leads from my comment. I didn't say anything about there being something wrong with being paid for labor.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#250

Post by TAForObvReasons »

beebmam wrote: post #246
colordrops wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Build a free bridge across a river, which allows a town to grow on the other side, then shut down free access to the bridge. The builders are entitled to do this, but doesn't make it the right thing to do.

What is the problem with wanting to be paid for your labor?

The example is flawed. What really happens in open source is that the users contribute bug reports and fixes, then the project maintainers privatize the use after extracting value. Should the users who contributed code and issues be paid as well?

For better or for worse, the success of many large open source projects is driven by a community of evangelists that just wouldn't exist if the project weren't open source in the first place.

Post reply on HN