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

Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses

caddyserver.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–295 of 295 posts

Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses

#291

Post by BrandoElFollito »

camus2 wrote: post #283
BrandoElFollito wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> never heard anything like that in my life. Just yesterday I was whipping a team because they built their own version of Apache (for dubious reasons) and broke the patch management system. To quote myself "why the fuck didn't you use the distribution packaged version?? Now go and fix that right now, it is your problem" I think it pretty much covers the case.

Yes, and you don't have to pay to use a packaged distribution of Apache free of adware. > I think it pretty much covers the case. I think it pretty much doesnt.

What adware? In which packages? What kind of payment are you talking about? Redhat?

Have you ever maintained a bunch (100 to a few thousand) machines where everyone builds his stuff from scratch according to their under the shower visions ? I have and now I will hit the ones who step one nanometer outside the only true and god provided package, that is straight from the distribution.

And yes - it does cover the case of you NEVER seeing that. Now you have seen.

Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses

#292

Post by pryelluw »

nqzero wrote: post #238
pryelluw wrote: post #51

1. I applaud this effort. 2. Ive been researching sustainable funding models for open source. Will the maintainers be blogging about the progress and results? Would be useful to learn about what they discover.

i've been trying to come up with a license that captures enough of the freedoms of open source to protect the user while allowing for a non-zero cost. my license is below - it's not open source, but if you're willing to consider licenses that are liberal but not OS, i'd love to hear your comments http://db4j.org/pupl/PUPL

Thanks for posting. Ill check it out. :)

Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses

#294

Post by warrenm »

kevinburke wrote: post #146

I'm excited that Caddy has taken steps to ensure its long term survival. Sad people can't be bothered to pay for software they like.

Lots of us (myself, certainly) do pay for software we like

This argument doesn't really hold water: there are for-pay editions of all kinds of tools out there - Caddy easily could have taken one of those routes.

They didn't.

Re: Announcing Caddy Commercial Licenses

#295

Post by tylersmith »

kyledrake wrote: post #252
tylersmith wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're talking about adware modifying traffic to pester you into licensing. The nginx model of selling additional features is in fact much better.

It only advertises to people hitting your site with curl or looking at the HTTP headers, so basically sysops guys curious about what your stack is. Actual end users will almost never see it. So what? We switched to OpenResty lately for our nginx bundle and it changes the nginx Server header to OpenResty, and I cared so little I didn't even bother to put a sed command in our install script to change it. It could say D…

> It only advertises to people hitting your site with curl or looking at the HTTP headers, so basically sysops guys curious about what your stack is. Actual end users will almost never see it. So what?

Injecting any data into network traffic is unacceptable.

> Please have a perspective here and understand that these developers are just trying to make a living, just like all of us are.

Sure. I also work on an open source project for a living. But modifying network traffic should not be an accepted form of DRM IMO. I fully support a pricing model. If this change hadn't prompted me to rip out Caddy and replace with nginx I would have paid the Caddy team instead of paying nginx which I do now.

They have the right to do it, but it was a foolish mistake if their goal is to get and retain customers.

Post reply on HN